Whatsapp 93125-11015 For Details
Editorial
On March 30, the Lahore High Court annulled the offence of ‘sedition’ in the Pakistan Penal code. Embarrassingly, around the same time in India, the police registered a series of complaints in Delhi and in Ahmedabad, and also arrested several people, including owners of the printing presses involved, for posting anti-government (and specifically, anti-Modi) posters across town.
The detainees were not accused of ‘sedition,’ but were booked for criminal conspiracy to cause public mischief and to deface public property. The printing press is alleged to have breached some provision of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867.
The law that was struck down in Lahore is almost identical to India’s Section 124A, which seeks to criminalise words that bring “into hatred or contempt, or excite disaffection” towards the government established by law.
In India, too, a challenge is pending before the Supreme Court. The law is in abeyance, although not formally struck down. Yet, the logic of the law of sedition, which demands reverence to established ideas and to those who espouse them, survives.
Pakistan has a thriving practice in the use of the law of blasphemy, exercised usually on its poorest citizens. India, which is secular and does not criminalise blasphemy, has a near approximation in the “hurting of sentiments.”
The state recently arrested actor Chetan Kumar and remanded him to 14 days in judicial custody, before granting him bail and threatening to revoke his overseas citizenship, for his tweet on Hindutva.
It would seem that while constitutional courts are examining the validity of the law of sedition, its defining logic has already leaped forward and transplanted itself into several different provisions of law that criminalise speech.
A fountainhead of the people’s hopes and aspirations (Page no. 6)
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)
In its 75th year of Independence, India is set to witness a historic moment with the inauguration of the new Parliament House on May 28.
After using a Parliament building that is nearly a century old and symbolised a colonial era, we finally have a new structure in independent India. It reflects the vision and aspirations of a country that has evolved significantly since 1947.
Some people may be misled by the idea that this is a new Parliament set up. But the new building will be another extension of the existing Parliament complex to signify the spirit of change and continuity; the journey of our Parliament from what it was yesterday to what it would be in the future.
The old building gave direction to independent India, while the new one will witness the making of India as ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’.
The main Parliament House, inaugurated in 1927, consists of the circular-shaped structure which is visible from the outside. Two more floors were added to this building in 1956 to accommodate more staff and other offices.
The need for yet more office space led to the construction of the Parliament Annexe in 1975. In 2002, the Parliament Library was added to the complex. For similar reasons, an extension of the Parliament Annexe was constructed in 2016.
Despite these new constructions in the Parliament complex to suit administrative needs, the need for modern facilities in the main Parliament House remained unfulfilled.
Apart from the shortage of space inside the Parliament House, there were several other challenges. The existing Parliament House is a majestic structure with a unique architectural style, but it presents a different view from the inside.
It had to be retrofitted multiple times, which left little space for further improvements. Swathes of wires are squeezed under covers.
The inner ceilings of both the Chambers and the Central Hall were provided with safety nettings to prevent any tiles and plaster from falling down.
The multiple wirings for computers, air conditioners and security gadgets gave the complex a highly shabby look. In 2012, the Rajya Sabha proceedings had to be adjourned due to a peculiar stench emanating from AC ducts.
News
European Union official seeks to allay India’s concerns on ‘carbon tax’ (Page no. 9)
(GS Paper 3, Environment)
The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is not intended to be “protectionist” and only meant to avoid the problem of ‘carbon leakage,’ said Frans Timmermans, European Union’s chief climate negotiator.
Indian industries will have nothing to worry if the carbon-intensity of goods, for eg. steel, aluminium and iron, made in India and exported to the EU matches that of the goods made in the bloc.
We are now in the trial period of the CBAM and I can assure that the CBAM will be WTO-compliant and will be corrected if it is having unintended effects.
It is too early to make assumptions on levies and costs for Indian businesses. We are in constant touch with India on this. The only thing we will do to protect our industry is to avoid unfair competition on carbon footprint.
‘Carbon leakage,’ refers to cheaper, more carbon-intensive goods making their way into the EU at the expense of domestically manufactured products that have been manufactured using costlier, renewable energy.
To check such leakage, the EU brought into force this month the CBAM that, after 2026, will require EU companies to annually declare the quantity of goods imported into the EU in the preceding year and their embedded greenhouse gas emissions and effectively pay for excessive emissions via CBAM certificates that could reflect as taxes paid by importers to the EU.
Indian manufacturers have raised concerns that the tax will mean a 20-35% tariff on India’s exports of steel, aluminium and cement, that currently attract a duty of less than 3%. As much as 27% of India’s exports of steel, iron and aluminium products, or $8.2 billion, head to the EU.
The CBAM will initially apply to imports of certain goods and selected precursors whose production is carbon-intensive and at most significant risk of carbon leakage: cement, iron and steel, aluminium, fertilizers, electricity and hydrogen.
Mr. Timmermans met Environment Minister Bhupendra Yadav, Power Minister R.K. Singh and was also scheduled to meet Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman.
Other than trade and emissions, his visit was also to set the ground ahead of the 28th meeting of Conference of Parties (COP) scheduled in November in Dubai.
Darjeeling to join the list of most polluted cities of West Bengal, reveals study (Page no. 10)
(GS Paper 3, Environment)
A recent study by scientists has revealed that Darjeeling, the queen of hills and a popular tourist destination, may be on the way to becoming one of the most polluted cities of West Bengal.
The present study throws light on one of the geographically, climatically, and ecologically important high-altitude Himalayan stations in India, where people have been contributing as well as experiencing huge pollution loads but remained out of sight of the policy makers. The study raises a serious concern in front of the policy makers that a high-altitude tourist station such as Darjeeling in the eastern Himalayas would soon become a non-attainment city,” the paper stated.
The six cities in West Bengal that are considered non-attainment cities and did not meet the national ambient air quality standards were Asansol, Durgapur, Kolkata, Howrah, Haldia, and Barrackpore.
The research, spanning from 2009 to 2021, focused on characterising PM10 levels (very small pollutant particles found in dust and smoke) in Darjeeling. It determined that summer (March-May) and winter (December-February) were the two seasons in Darjeeling when PM10 concentrations exceeded 70 micrograms per cubic metre of air, surpassing the Indian standard of 60 micrograms per cubic metre. “
The study said that dust transport from the Indo-Gangetic plain, coal combustion from eateries, domestic use, and the Toy Train, as well as secondary sources, also played a role in the pollution.
World
Bhutan, China claims progress in boundary expert group talks (Page no. 11)
(GS Paper 3, Environment)
Bhutan and China said they had made more progress in implementing a “three-step roadmap” towards resolving their boundary dispute after talks in Thimphu.
The 12th Expert Group meeting (EGM), that oversees the actual boundary talks was held in the Bhutanese capital just four months after the 11th round of EGM talks were held in Kunming, and stressed on the “importance of increasing the frequency of their meetings.
However, the meeting didn’t announce any breakthrough in setting a date for the next round or the 25th round of boundary talks, which have not been held since 2016, and were suspended after the military standoff at Doklam, but said they agreed to hold them “as soon as possible at mutually convenient dates”.
The two sides expressed their confidence in the Three-Step Roadmap and reiterated the importance of increasing the frequency of their meetings to make further progress in its implementation.
They agreed to hold the next EGM in Beijing at an early date,” said the joint statement issued by Bhutanese and Chinese Foreign Ministers after the conclusion of the talks on May 24-25.
The meeting was held in a warm and friendly atmosphere in keeping with the close ties of friendship and cooperation between Bhutan and China.
While there was a two-year gap between the 10th round of the EGM held in April 2021 and the 11th round of the EGM held in January 2023, it is significant that the 12th round has followed within months and could indicate a more rapid development in the talks.
The announcement that next venue of the meeting is Beijing may also indicate progress, as the last few rounds have been held in Kunming or Thimphu and not in the Chinese capital.
The Bhutanese delegation, that included Bhutanese Ambassador to India Gen. (Retd) Vetsop Namgyel, was led by Letho Tobdhen Tangbi, Secretary of the International Boundaries, and the Chinese delegation was led by Hong Liang, Director-General of the Department Boundary and Ocean Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China.