Whatsapp 93125-11015 For Details
As Cyclone Biparjoy barrels towards Gujarat, the State government has shifted nearly 21,000 people from coastal areas to safer places.
The cyclone, which is likely to make landfall near Jakhau port in Kutch district, holds “extensive damaging potential” for the coastal districts of Saurashtra and Kutch.
According to the India Meteorological Department, Cyclone Biparjoy weakened from an extremely severe cyclone to a very severe cyclone.
It is expected to cross Saurashtra and Kutch in Gujarat and the adjoining Pakistan coast between Mandvi in Gujarat and Karachi in Pakistan near the Jakhau port (Gujarat) in the evening of June 15 with a maximum sustained wind speed of 125-150 kmph.
The cyclone could lead to extremely heavy rainfall (over 20 cm) at isolated places in Kutch, Devbhumi Dwarka, Jamnagar and Porbandar districts from June 13 to 15.
Gusty winds and rain may cause extensive damage to standing crops, houses, roads, electricity and communication poles.
Up to six-metre-high tidal waves are likely to inundate low-lying areas of Saurashtra and Kutch coasts. We have recommended evacuation of the population in such areas and action is being taken.
Editorial
Tax law in the shadow of the higher judiciary (Page no. 8)
(GS Paper 2, Judiciary)
India’s law of taxation is built on two central precepts. First, on the idea captured in Article 265 of the Constitution, that a tax may be imposed only with the authority of law.
Second, on a principle of sureness, that any levy ought to be clear, consistent, and predictable. Both these precepts emanate out of a larger commitment to the rule of law, in particular to values of legality and certainty.
Upholding these principles requires a commitment not only from the legislature but also from our courts too. But over the course of the last 12 months, there have been instances where the Supreme Court of India has undermined this commitment, by reversing well-reasoned judgments of High Courts, and by virtually enacting into existence taxes that lack legislative support.
Two judgments, delivered by Justice M.R. Shah who retired from the Supreme Court on May 15, represent noteworthy examples.
In the more recent of the rulings, in ITO vs Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia, the question before the Court concerned whether an amendment to a provision of the Income Tax Act, 1961, could have retrospective effect in the absence of legislative mandate.
The provision at stake, Section 153C of the Act, which stipulates the conditions under which a search made on a person’s premises could result in the opening of proceedings against other persons and entities.
Before an amendment to the law in 2015, Section 153C allowed the Revenue to proceed against third parties to a search, if material seized (such as money, bullion, jewellery, or books of accounts) “belongs or belong to” a person other than the one who was subject to the search.
Musings on the frictions in India-Canada ties (Page no. 8)
(GS Paper 2, International Relation)
During a pro-Khalistani parade on June 4 in Brampton, Canada, there was a tableau that depicted a lady clad in a white sari, who was bloodied, with two soldiers training their guns on her. The board behind her read, “Revenge of attack on Shri Darbar Sahib”. The side of the float carried the words, “Never forget 1984”. Clearly, the tableau figures depicted were that of India’s former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her assassins.
In a media conference on June 8, to commemorate nine years of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration, the External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar, was asked about the Brampton tableau.
He chose not to refer directly to the offensive float though he indirectly indicated that it was “egregious”. Instead, he focused, as he put it, on the “bigger” issue — the space Canada gives “to separatists, to extremists, to people who advocate violence.”
This stated, it is remarkable that Mr. Jaishankar could not get himself around to take the name of Indira Gandhi. The glorification of “revenge” by anyone for the assassination of an Indian Prime Minister is an issue beyond party politics or personal pique for it concerns the dignity of the nation.
This is so even if a Prime Minister took actions, like Indira Gandhi did in June 1984, that were controversial and the Congress party’s role in the anti-Sikh 1984 riots was condemnable.
Ironically, while Mr. Jaishankar did not name Indira Gandhi, the Canadian High Commissioner to India Cameron Mackay did. I am appalled by reports of an event in Canada that celebrated the assassination of late Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Indeed, the country’s positions would be better and more credibly articulated if the able, popular and powerful politician that Mr. Jaishankar has become does not completely obscure his former avatar of a distinguished diplomat.
Opinion
Where anyone can be accused of sedition (Page no. 9)
(GS Paper 2, Governance)
French author Andre Gide once said, “Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep going back and beginning all over again.”
This captures the current state of the debate on sedition in India. The 279th Law Commission Report, laying down the grounds for retaining sedition, is starkly symbolic of how “nobody listens.”
The Commission has made three significant recommendations. The first is that Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, which contains the law of sedition, be amended to incorporate the meaning of sedition which was laid down by the Supreme Court in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar in 1962.
The second is that the minimum sentence be increased from three to seven years. The third is that First Information Reports (FIR) in sedition cases should be registered only after a police officer, holding the rank of an Inspector or higher, makes a “preliminary enquiry.”
In proposing that an amendment be made to the law by adding the words “tendency to incite violence,” the Commission deflects attention to the ambit of criminality rather than focusing on the source of criminality.
The proposed amendment will not fundamentally alter the meaning of sedition as the offence of inciting hatred, contempt and disaffection against the government.
The source of the crime remains political speech against the representative government in a democracy. The Commission claims that only those forms of expressions will be penalised which have a “tendency” to incite violence, but muddies the legal waters further by adding that “tendency” means “mere inclination to incite violence rather than proof of actual violence or imminent threat to violence.”
Explainer
HAP to take AI governance global (Page no. 10)
(GS Paper 3, Science and Tech)
The annual Group of Seven (G-7) Summit, hosted by Japan, took place in Hiroshima from May 19-21. Among other matters, the G-7 Hiroshima Leaders’ Communiqué initiated the Hiroshima AI Process (HAP) — an effort by this bloc to determine a way forward to regulate Artificial Intelligence (AI).
The ministerial declaration of the G-7 Digital and Tech Ministers’ Meeting, on April 30, discussed “responsible AI” and global AI governance, and said, “we reaffirm our commitment to promote human-centric and trustworthy AI based on the OECD AI Principles and to foster collaboration to maximise the benefits for all brought by AI technologies”.
Even as the G-7 countries are using such fora to deliberate AI regulation, they are acting on their own instead of waiting for the outcomes from the HAP.
So while there is an accord to regulate AI, the discord — as evident in countries preferring to go their own paths — will also continue.
The communiqué accorded more importance to AI than the technology has ever received in such a forum — even as G-7 leaders were engaged with other issues like the war in Ukraine, economic security, supply chain disruptions, and nuclear disarmament.
It said that the G-7 is determined to work with others to “advance international discussions on inclusive AI governance and interoperability to achieve our common vision and goal of trustworthy AI, in line with our shared democratic value”.
To quote the G-7 communiqué at further length, “we recognise the need to immediately take stock of the opportunities and challenges of generative AI, which is increasingly prominent across countries and sectors, and encourage international organisations such as the OECD (Organisation for Economics Co-operation and Development) to consider analysis on the impact of policy developments and Global Partnership on AI (GPAI) to conduct practical projects.
In this respect, we task relevant ministers to establish the Hiroshima AI process, through a G7 working group, in an inclusive manner and in cooperation with the OECD and GPAI, for discussions on generative AI by the end of this year.
These discussions could include topics such as governance, safeguard of intellectual property rights including copyrights, promotion of transparency, response to foreign information manipulation, including disinformation, and responsible utilisation of these technologies.
News
India, U.S. to diversify semi-conductor supply chain: Sullivan (Page no. 12)
(GS Paper 2, International Relation)
India’s National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval and the U.S. NSA Jake Sullivan met in New Delhi and discussed regional and global issues of mutual relevance, a press note issued by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) informed.
Later, Mr. Sullivan, who is on a two-day India visit, attended a round table on “Advancing India-U.S. initiative on critical and emerging technologies (iCET)” organised by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), where he said that India and the U.S. will “diversify global semi-conductor supply chains”.
The U.S. and India are poised to lead in clean energy transformation, shore up and diversify global semi-conductor supply chains and supply chains in other critical goods and lead the revolution in AI (Artificial Intelligence), advanced computing, biotech, and quantum computing.
We have established a Strategic Trade Dialogue. It will serve as a platform to address regulatory barriers and issues relating to export control.
It will be a very important element in this entire matter. iCET is going to be a very important pillar of our bilateral strategic partnership,” Mr. Doval said, expressing the commitment of the governments in the iCET.
Blinken says economic ties centre of India-U.S. strategic partnership (Page no. 12)
(GS Paper 2, International Relation)
Ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s state visit, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said economic ties are at the heart of the Indo-U.S. strategic partnership and added that the two countries are helping shape innovations of the future and the norms governing them.
Mr. Modi has been invited by U.S. President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden for a state visit, which will include a state dinner on June 22.
Addressing the annual ‘India Ideas Summit’ of the U.S.-India Business Council (USIBC) here on Monday, Mr. Blinken said, “At the heart of our strategic partnership is our economic ties.
And under the leadership of President Biden and Prime Minister Modi — and private sector leaders like you — it is growing stronger by the day.”
Mr. Blinken added that last year trade between the two countries reached a record $191 billion, making the U.S. the largest trading partner for India. American companies have invested at least $54 billion in India — from manufacturing to telecommunic- ations.
In the U.S., he said, Indian companies had invested over $40 billion — in IT, pharmaceuticals and more — supporting 4,25,000 jobs.
This February, Air India announced the historic purchase of more than 200 Boeing aircraft that will support an estimated one million-plus jobs across 44 States.
We’re here ahead of a historic State Visit by Prime Minister Modi — one that will further solidify what President Biden has called a ‘defining relationship’ of the 21st century.
We see this defining relationship in our unique connection as the world’s oldest and largest democracies, with a special obligation to demonstrate that our governments can deliver for and empower all our citizens.
Business
Disinflation to be slow and long: Das (Page no. 16)
(GS Paper 3, Economy)
The disinflation process in India will be slow and protracted, with the 4% inflation target likely to be met only over the medium term, Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Governor Shaktikanta Das said.
The cumulative impact of our monetary policy actions over the last one year is still unfolding and yet to materialise fully,” Mr. Das said in a speech at the Summer Meetings organised by Central Banking in London.
While our inflation projection for the current financial year 2023-24 is lower, at 5.1%, it would still be well above the target.
The RBI’s monetary policy committee (MPC), headed by the RBI chief, is tasked with bringing down inflation to 4% over the medium term and holding it between 2% and 6% over the long term.
Latest data showed India’s annual retail inflation cooled to 4.25% in May from 4.7% in April, but analysts expect prices to remain sticky in the coming months.
As per our current assessment, the disinflation process is likely to be slow and protracted, with convergence to the inflation target of 4% being achieved over the medium-term.
Mr. Das said regulators cannot be oblivious to growth concerns given the outsized addition to the workforce every year because of the ‘demographic dividend’ in the world’s most populous country.