fbpx

Election Commission Appointments: Supreme Court’s Landmark Order

At a time when practically every political issue is a subject of  adjudication before the Court, the Supreme Court of India (SC) continues to be the most potent centre of political power in the nation. In Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India, the main relief requested was a neutral body to choose the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other Election Commissioners. The Court granted this request as of Thursday’s decision. The ruling brings back the days of judicial activism.

Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India: The chronology

PIL: Current system of appointing Election Commissioners is unconstitutional: In January 2015, Anoop Baranwal filed a PIL on the ground that the current system for appointing members of the Election Commission of India (ECI) is unconstitutional. Currently, the Executive enjoys the power to make appointments.

Pleads for Independent system: The PIL pleads for the Court to issue directions to set up an independent, Collegium-like system for ECI appointments.

Article 324:

Article 324 specifies that while the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners will be appointed by the President, this is subject to Parliamentary law (if such law exists).

While this provision places an expectation on Parliament to draft a relevant a law, it has not done so up until now. In the absence of such a law, the President has been making appointments as per the recommendations of the Prime Minister.

Union government’s defence: The Union has defended the current mechanism of appointments, citing the honest record of all past Chief Commissioners.

Urged court not to intervene: It has urged the Court to not intervene, submitting that the matter falls within the executive domain.

Recent verdict: The Supreme Court held that a committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India will advise the President on appointments to the Election Commission of India until Parliament enacts a law on the subject.

What are the issues with Election commission?

The bone of contention: Petitioners argued that as per Article 324(2), CEC and ECs appointments must be based on a law, but no law was enacted. Taking advantage of this scenario, the dispensation at the Centre chooses the CEC and ECs, who are often seen to act in tune with those in power and those who select them. Therefore, the petitioners pleaded for an independent body for appointments.

Immunity for CEC and Susceptibility of ECs: Article 324(5) provides immunity to CEC but not to other ECs. CEC can only be removed like a Supreme Court judge. Other ECs may be more susceptible to the executive due to lack of security of tenure.

CEC and EC’s autonomy is linked to their selection process. In an electoral autocracy, executive control undermines fair elections.

Supreme court’s Judgement: A great leap

Great leap towards a sustainable democracy: An independent committee consisting of the prime minister, leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha or the leader of the largest party in opposition and the Chief Justice of India for selecting the CEC is a great leap towards a sustainable democracy.

Total Independence: The far-reaching verdict also means the Election Commission will have an independent secretariat, rule-making powers, an independent budget, and equal protection from impeachment.

Bench remarks: Democracy can succeed only if all stakeholders work on it to maintain the purity of the election process, so as to reflect the will of the people.

South Asia Need to Invest In Human Capital

In the recent years, a harsh new reality has emerged in which catastrophes are more common than not. Extreme weather, economic downturns, and pandemics were once considered tail-end threats, but since 2020, all three have struck South Asia in quick succession. Governments in South Asia must make decisive policy decisions and invest in human capital in order to increase resilience and safeguard the welfare of future generations.

Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka are the nations that make up South Asia.

Population: The region is the most populous in the world, with a total population of approximately 1.8 billion.

Geography: South Asia has a diverse geography, with mountain ranges such as the Himalayas and Hindu Kush, major rivers like the Ganges, Indus, and Brahmaputra, and coastal areas along the Arabian Sea, Bay of Bengal, and Indian Ocean.

Economy: India is the largest economy in the region, accounting for more than 70% of the region’s total GDP. Agriculture is a major employer in most countries, with rice and wheat being staple crops. The manufacturing sector is also a significant contributor to the region’s economy, with textiles, garments, and leather products being major exports

Climate: The climate of South Asia is varied, with the monsoon season bringing heavy rainfall to much of the region and causing flooding in some areas. The region’s geography and size also result in varying climate patterns. In general, the region experiences hot and humid summers and mild winters.

Climate Change Risks: Climate change poses significant risks to the region, with some areas, such as the Maldives, at risk of sea level rise. Other risks include increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events, such as floods and droughts. The region is also vulnerable to the impacts of climate change on health, including increased incidence of heat-related illness and infectious diseases.

Biodiversity and Environmental Threats:

South Asia is home to several biodiversity hotspots, such as the Western Ghats in India and the Eastern Himalayas.

However, the region faces significant environmental threats, such as deforestation, air and water pollution, and climate change.

Deforestation is a major problem in the region, with logging and land use change leading to habitat destruction and loss of biodiversity.

World Bank study: Interdependence of health, education and skills for human development

A new World Bank study, Collapse and Recovery: how COVID eroded human capital and what to do about it, analyses the pandemic’s impacts on young people, stresses the multi-dimensional and complementary nature of human development.

The health, education, and skills people acquire at various stages of their lives, build and depend on each other.

To be effective, human development systems must recognise and exploit these overlapping connections. In other words, they should be agile, resilient and adaptive.

 FCRA licence of Centre for Policy Research suspended

The licence of the Centre for Policy Research under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) has been suspended by the Union Home Ministry (CPR).

Concerning CPR

The CPR was founded in 1973 as a think tank with the goal of strengthening public conversation on issues affecting Indian society.

Its main office may be found at Chanakyapuri, New Delhi.

It is a non-profit, non-partisan, independent organisation whose mission is to produce research that advances superior scholarship and better public policies.

It has developed a reputation as one of the top public policy think tanks in the nation over the years.

How come its licence was revoked?

According to accusations, the CPR received foreign funds in contravention of the FCRA.

What is FCRA?

The FCRA regulates foreign donations and ensures that such contributions do not adversely affect internal security.

First enacted in 1976, it was amended in 2010 when a slew of new measures was adopted to regulate foreign donations.

The FCRA is applicable to all associations, groups and NGOs which intend to receive foreign donations.

It is mandatory for all such NGOs to register themselves under the FCRA.

The registration is initially valid for five years and it can be renewed subsequently if they comply with all norms.

Why was FCRA enacted?

The FCRA sought to consolidate the acceptance and utilisation of foreign contribution or foreign hospitality by individuals, associations or companies.

It sought to prohibit such contributions from being used for activities detrimental to national interest.

What was the recent Amendment?

The FCRA was amended in September 2020 to introduce some new restrictions.

The Government says it did so because it found that many recipients were wanting in compliance with provisions relating to filing of annual returns and maintenance of accounts.

Many did not utilise the funds received for the intended objectives.

It claimed that the annual inflow as foreign contributions almost doubled between 2010 and 2019.

The FCRA registration of 19,000 organisations was cancelled and, in some cases, prosecution was also initiated.

How has the law changed?

There are at least three major changes that NGOs find too restrictive.

Prohibition of fund transfer: An amendment to Section 7 of the Act completely prohibits the transfer of foreign funds received by an organisation to any other individual or association.

Directed and single bank account: Another amendment mandates that every person (or association) granted a certificate or prior permission to receive overseas funds must open an FCRA bank account in a designated branch of the SBI in New Delhi.

Utilization of funds: All foreign funds should be received only in this account and none other. However, the recipients are allowed to open another FCRA bank account in any scheduled bank for utilisation.

Shared information The designated bank will inform authorities about any foreign remittance with details about its source and the manner in which it was received.

Aadhaar mandate: In addition, the Government is also authorised to take the Aadhaar numbers of all the key functionaries of any organisation that applies for FCRA registration or for prior approval for receiving foreign funds.

Cap on administrative expenditure: Another change is that the portion of the receipts allowed as administrative expenditure has been reduced from 50% to 20%.

What is the criticism against these changes?

Arbitrary restrictions: NGOs questioning the law consider the prohibition on transfer arbitrary and too heavy a restriction.

Non-sharing of funds: One of its consequences is that recipients cannot fund other organisations. When foreign help is received as material, it becomes impossible to share the aid.

Irrationality of designated bank accounts: There is no rational link between designating a particular branch of a bank with the objective of preserving national interest.

Un-ease of operation: Due to Delhi based bank account, it is also inconvenient as the NGOS might be operating elsewhere.

Illogical narrative: ‘National security’ cannot be cited as a reason without adequate justification as observed by the Supreme Court in Pegasus Case.

What does the Government say?

Zero tolerance against intervention: The amendments were necessary to prevent foreign state and non-state actors from interfering with the country’s polity and internal matters.

Diversion of foreign funds: The changes are also needed to prevent malpractices by NGOs and diversion of foreign funds.

Fund flow monitoring: The provision of having one designated bank for receiving foreign funds is aimed at making it easier to monitor the flow of funds.

Ease of operation: The Government clarified that there was no need for anyone to come to Delhi to open the account as it can be done remotely.

Academic Freedom in India declined strongly since 2013: Report

According to a recent study, India is in the bottom 30 percent of all 179 nations for academic freedom.

Academic Freedom Index Update, 2023

2,917 country experts from around the world worked together to produce the report.

It was coordinated by the Institute of Political Science of the Friedrich Alexander University in Germany and the Swedish think tank V-Dem Institute.

It listed 22 nations where it said colleges and academics now had much less academic freedom than they did ten years ago, including India, China, the United States, and Mexico.

Five indicators are measured by the index score:

freedom of academic interchange and dissemination, freedom of research and teaching,

University institutional autonomy

Academic freedom, cultural diversity, and upholding the integrity of the university

On-campus security violations and surveillance are nonexistent.

What one means by academic freedom?

Academic freedom refers to the independence and autonomy that scholars and researchers have in pursuing their academic work, without fear of censorship, retaliation, or repression from the government or other entities.

It includes the freedom to conduct research, publish findings, and express opinions and ideas, without interference or pressure from external forces.

It is considered a cornerstone of higher education and is essential for the advancement of knowledge and the free exchange of ideas.

India’s performance

India is ranked among the bottom 30% with an index score of less than 0.4 among the 179 countries assessed by the researchers.

On a scale of 0 (low) to 1 (high), India scored 0.38, lower than Pakistan’s 0.43 and the United States’ 0.79, says the report. LOL!

The report has ranked the United States among the top 50% of countries with an index score just below 0.8. China has been ranked among the bottom 10% with a score of less than 0.1.

The report said that academic freedom in India began to decline in 2009 with a drop in university autonomy, followed by “a sharp downturn in all indicators” from 2013.

Reasons for such poor ratings

A lack of a legal framework to protect academic freedom has enabled attacks on academic freedom.

The report sees there is notable pressure on the institutional dimensions of academic freedom — institutional autonomy and campus integrity.

Again anti-India narrative

The report sees regime change in India since as a declining trend in the country’s academic freedom.

All such reports are being increasingly publicized ahead of India’s general elections in 2024.

 World Wildlife Day- 2023: 50 years of the CITES

The 1973 CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora celebrates its 50th anniversary on March 3.

Why is World Wildlife Day marked?

The date of the foundation of CITES is March 3.

The landmark conservation agreement known as CITES is dedicated to protecting the survival of threatened and endangered species.

In order to celebrate and increase awareness of the need to safeguard wild animals and plants around the world, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) designated March 3 as UN World Wildlife Day in 2013.

This was due to the fact that on this day in 1973, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was signed.

What is the CITES?

CITES stands for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

It is as an international agreement aimed at ensuring “that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival”.

It was drafted after a resolution was adopted at a meeting of the members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in 1963.

It entered into force on July 1, 1975, and now has 183 parties.

The Convention is legally binding on the Parties in the sense that they are committed to implementing it; however, it does not take the place of national laws.

India is a signatory to and has also ratified CITES convention in 1976.

CITES Appendices

CITES works by subjecting international trade in specimens of selected species to certain controls.

All import, export, re-exports and introduction from the sea of species covered by the convention has to be authorized through a licensing system.

It has three appendices:

Appendix I includes species threatened with extinction. Trade-in specimens of these species are permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

Appendix II provides a lower level of protection.

Appendix III contains species that are protected in at least one country, which has asked other CITES Parties for assistance in controlling trade.

A critical assessment

Having wildlife allowed to be traded further legitimises their movement and increases the possibility of their illegal trade.

Nearly two-thirds of cases, CITES protections lag after a species is determined to be threatened by international trade a/c to NatGeo.

For example, while pangolins were finally added to Appendix I in 2017, an estimated million were trafficked between 2000 and 2013.

Its laxity has been questioned, on matters such as the ivory trade being allowed at times despite the convention banning it in 1989.

Scroll to Top