Daily Current Affairs

Ban on PFI under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) (GS Paper 2, Governance)

Why in news?

• Recently, the Central government has banned the Popular Front of India (PFI) under Section 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, for a period of five years.

 

Background:

• The government’s decision came after the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) conducted multiple raids across the country on the PFI and its members. In the first round of raids, 106 people belonging to PFI were arrested.
• Meanwhile, in the second round of raids, 247 people belonging to PFI were arrested/detained. Investigating agencies got enough evidence against the outfit, based on which the decision to ban the outfit was taken.

 

What is Popular Front of India (PFI)?

• The PFI describes itself as an organisation that works towards "the achievement of socio-economic, cultural and political empowerment of the deprived and the downtrodden and the nation at large".
• But it was born out of the controversial National Development Fund (NDF) that was set up in Kerala in 1994, two years after the Babri Masjid demolition incident to protect the interest of the Muslim community.
• On 22 November 2006, the NDF merged with Tamil Nadu's ManithaNeethiPasarai (MNP) and the Karnataka Forum for Dignity (KFD) to form the Popular Front of India.
• Both MNP and KFD were founded with the agenda to work on issues related to minority rights and other social causes, but both the groups have occasionally been alleged to have terror links.

 

What is Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA)?

• The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) lays down the definitions and rules for designating an organisation as an "unlawful association" if it is engaged in certain types of activities.
• The government can then issue a notification designating such an organisation as a terrorist organisation, if it believes that the organisation is part of "terrorist activities."
• Under section 2(o) of the UAPA, an unlawful activity in relation to an individual or association means any action taken by such an individual or association (whether by committing an act or by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise),

1. which is intended, or supports any claim, to bring about, on any ground whatsoever, the cession of a part of the territory of India or the secession of a part of the territory of India from the Union, or which incites any individual or group of individuals to bring about such cession or secession; or
2. which disclaims, questions, disrupts or is intended to disrupt the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India; or
3. which causes or is intended to cause disaffection against India;

 

The UAPA also defines an "Unlawful Association" under section 2(p) as meaning any association,--

1. which has for its object any unlawful activity, or which encourages or aids persons to undertake any unlawful activity, or of which the members undertake such activity; or
2. which has for its object any activity which is punishable under section 153A (45 of 1860) or section 153B of the Indian Penal Code, or which encourages or aids persons to undertake any such activity, or of which the members undertake any such activity.

• Under the Act, therefore, 'unlawful activity' is not limited to terror activities relating to causing direct violence or attacks, it also includes any activities that disrupt the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country, disrupts the economic stability of the country or causes disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different reli­gious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communi­ties in the country.
• Related and ancillary acts, including financing, support or promotion of any such activities are also "unlawful activity".

 

What does the Notification say?

• At present, the MHA notification has said that the PFI and its affiliated organisations are being notified as "Unlawful Associations" with immediate effect.
• The Gazette notification accused the PFI of "pursuing a secret agenda to radicalize a particular section of society working towards undermining the concept of democracy and showing sheer disrespect towards the constitutional authority and constitutional set up of the country."
• It has been alleged that the "PFI is involved in several criminal and terror cases and shows sheer disrespect towards the constitutional authority of the country and, with funds and ideological support from outside, it has become a major threat to the internal security of the country."
• Further, the PFI is accused of "engaging in violent and subversive acts. Criminal violent acts carried out by PFI include chopping off the limb of a college professor, cold-blooded killings of persons associated with organisations espousing other faiths, obtaining explosives to target prominent people and places and destruction of public property."
• The Government has also claimed that there is evidence of "international linkages of PFI with Global Terrorist Groups and some activists of PFI have joined the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)". PFI leaders have also been accused of receiving funds from foreign countries and money laundering.
• For these reasons, the government notified PFI as an 'Unlawful Association' with immediate effect.

 

What does the ban mean?

• The notification means that the membership of, support or financing to the PFI and the allied banned organizations, such as the Rehab India Foundation (RIF), Campus Front of India (CFI), All India Imams Council (AIIC), National Confederation of Human Rights Organization (NCHRO), National Women’s Front, Junior Front, Empower India Foundation, and Rehab Foundation, Kerala; is now illegal.
• Any person who is a member of these organisations can face arrest, and joining membership of these organisations is a criminal offence.
• The government can also seize the properties, bank accounts and offices connected to these organisations.

 

What is the process of banning an Organisation?

• Before issuing a notification under Section 3 of the UAPA, the government conducts an analysis of threat perception to peace in the country, secession activities, territorial safety, terrorism etc. The recommendations and complaints by a state government can also be considered based on FIRs filed or incidents in the state.
• Section 3 also allows the government to implement an "immediate ban" on an organisation, "if the central government is of the opinion that circumstances exist which render it necessary".
• However, the Gazette notification of the government is required to give reasons and allegations against the organisation and its members.

 

Tribunal:

• Within 30 days of the notification, the government has to set up a tribunal, headed by a sitting Judge of a High Court, to consider the evidence and allegations. The tribunal has the power to consider the evidence, hear the objections from the organisation or its members/supporters and then take a decision to confirm or deny the ban.
• A public notice is issued by the tribunal for responses to the notifications. Persons connected to the organisation can submit affidavits or statements to the tribunal.
• Many times, the tribunal holds hearings not only in the court premises, but also in other areas in the state where the organisation operates.
• The Tribunal has six months under the law to conduct proceedings and either accept or reject the proposed ban.

 

For the tribunal to uphold the ban, the government would have to show evidence for:

• deliberate acts/statements made by an organization or its leaders that come within the definition of 'Unlawful Activities'
• witness statements that unlawful activities were carried out
• FIRs and complaints against the organisation or its leaders
• evidence that the statement/activity by the organisation had any impact/link to an event or incident that falls under the definition of terrorism, disruption, disaffection or disharmony

 

During these proceedings, the organisation and its members can also appear before the tribunal to oppose the ban. The organisation will have to give evidence that:

• no links found between their activities and the alleged offence
• the organisation has expelled/distanced from the specific leader whose statement/activity is under scrutiny
• if their source of funds, books of accounts show no link to the alleged offences
• that the activities carried out by the organisation are not within the definition of 'Unlawful Activity'

Appeal before HC:

• If the tribunal upholds the ban, the organisation can also move an appeal before the concerned High Court, in case it can show "patent error" or "perversity" in the tribunal order, and show that the tribunal ignored key evidence.
• The government notification is scrutinised by the tribunal, which considers all allegations and evidence.

 

New Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Appointed

(GS Paper 3, Defence)

Why in news?

• The Centre has appointed Lt General Anil Chauhan as India’s new Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) who shall also function as Secretary to Government of India, Department of Military Affairs.

Background:

• The development comes more than nine months after post fell vacant following the death of General BipinRawat, India’s first Chief of Defence Staff, who assumed the role in January 2020.
• Rawat and his wife were killed in December after a military chopper crashed in Tamil Nadu, killing 13 on board. The only survivor, an Air Force Group Captain, died of severe burns later.

Retired officer appointed:

• The Centre announced that retired 61-year-old Army officer has been appointed as the CDS.
• This is the first time a retired officer has been appointed to the post.
• Additionally, this is also the first time that a retired three-star officer returns to active service in a four-star position.

Who is Lt General Anil Chauhan?

• He is an alumnus of the National Defence Academy, Khadakwasla, and Indian Military Academy, Dehradun.
• He retired in May 2021 as the Eastern Command Chief, which means he served for a period of over nearly 40 years.
• During service as Major General, he had commanded an Infantry Division in Jammu and Kashmir’s Baramulla sector in the Northern Command. Later as Lt General, he commanded a corps in the North East and then became General Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Eastern Command from September 2019 until he retired from service.
• In 2019 during the Balakot strike, he was the Director General of Military Operations.

 

About CDS:

• The Centre decided to establish the post of Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) of the Armed Forces in 2019 – on the recommendations of a committee headed by Lt General DB Shekatkar – to bolster the nation’s military prowess and bring about more operational cohesiveness between  the army, the navy and the air force.
• The CDS brings about jointness in operation, logistics, transport, training, support services, communications, repairs and maintenance of the three services.

 

The CDS plays two roles:

• As permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee comprising the three service chiefs as members.
• As main military adviser to the defence minister as head of the Department of Military Affairs (DMA).

 

Amendments in June 2022:

• The new CDS became eligible for the post after the Centre changes the rules for CDS appointments in June.
• The Centre had issued a notification making all serving and recently-retired three-star officers under the age of 62 eligible for the post of CDS.
• Notably, the government had announced that any serving or retired Lt General, Air Marshal or Vice Admiral would be eligible to be appointed as the CDS.
• It further said that the government may extend the service of the Chief of Defence Staff for such a period as it may deem necessary subject to a maximum age of 65 years.
• The move essentially widened the available military talent pool from which a CDS could be appointed and made it possible for the second-in-command of the army, navy and air force to supersede their seniors.

 

WHO, ILO lay down guidelines to tackle stress in workplaces

(GS Paper 2, International Organisation)

 

Why in news?

• Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) have issued guidelines to address mental health issues among the global workforce.
• WHO’s guidelines on mental health at work, recommended measures to address threats to mental healthsuch as excessive workloads and negative behaviours.
• The WHO has also suggested manager training to avoid stressful work settings and assist distressed employees .

Why focus on mental health at work?

• Depression and anxiety are thought to account for 12 billion lost workdays annually, costing the world economy close to $1 trillion.
• Five per cent of the working-age population had mental illness and only 35 per cent of countries had national programmes for work-related mental health promotion in place. 
• An unhealthy work culture accentuates broader socio-economic problems, such as inequality and discrimination, which affect mental health.
• One of the most common workplace harassment is bullying or psychological assault, commonly known as mobbing.

 

Quiet quitting’ & ‘Quiet hustling’:

• The guidelines have been released at a time when employees are responding to hostile post-pandemic working environments with mechanisms like ‘quiet quitting’ and ‘quiet hustling’.
• Quiet quitting is a misnormer. Contrary to the name, quiet quitters are workers who decide to remain in their positions while pledging to perform only those duties related to their jobs and nothing else.
• Quiet hustlers are those who experience a mismatch in expectations at their principal place of employment. They may quietly start a side business.
• Though it is not a new practice, there is now more open discussion about the habit of quietly handling workplace issues without an active conversation or involvement.

 

Impact of pandemic:

• COVID-19 caused a 25 per cent increase in anxiety and despair, demonstrating how poorly governments anticipated its effects on mental health.
• The pandemic highlighted a persistent lack of mental health resources globally. Governments globally allocated just 2 per cent of their health budgets to mental health in 2020, with lower-middle-income nations allocating less than 1 per cent.

 

Guidelines:

• There is need to invest in reshaping the working environment to stop stigma and social exclusion and ensure employees with mental health conditions feel protected and supported.
• The guidelines also suggested improved approaches to meeting the requirements of workers with mental health disorders and prescribed interventions that promote their return to work.
• It also offered paid employment mechanisms for people with severe mental health conditions. 
• The guidelines emphasised the need for actions to protect medical, humanitarian and emergency personnel.

 

In natures warning signs, a nudge to riparian states

(GS Paper 3, Environment)

Context:

• There has been an increase in the magnitude, the frequency and the intensity of floods in many parts of the world. As an example, nearly a third of Pakistan is experiencing devastation, with a spread of diseases and severe shortage of potable water after intense flooding.
• In June 2022, Assam experienced one of its worst floods in living memory whichaffected over 30 districts. In some districts in Assam and Bihar, flooding is a recurrent feature, and thus a major impediment in ensuring poverty alleviation and meeting Millennium Development Goals. 

Lack of Transparency:

• Flooding is still considered to be a natural phenomenon that cannot be entirely prevented.
• But it is compounded by the lack of transparency in the sharing of hydrological information and also information relating to activities (such as by one riparian state) that are transboundary in their effect (affecting other riparian states), thus serving as an obstacle in understanding the magnitude of flooding.

 

Customary International Law:

• In accordance with customary international law, no state has to use its territory in a manner that causes harm to another state while using a shared natural resource; this amounts to saying that there is a binding obligation on all states not to release water to cause floods in another co-sharer of the river water.
• This obligation gives rise to other procedural norms that support the management of floods, which include notification of planned measures, the exchange of data and information, and also public participation.
• The International Court of Justice (ICJ), in the Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina vs Uruguay) case (2010), upheld that conducting a transboundary environmental impact assessment (TEIA) of a planned measure or projects on the shared water course is part of customary international law.
• In fact, the ICJ noted that the acting state must notify the affected party of the results of TEIA to “enable the notified party to participate in the process of ensuring that the assessment is complete, so that it can then consider the plan and its effects with a full knowledge of the facts”.

 

The Brahmaputra and India’s concerns:

• China being the upper riparian in the Brahmaputra, which spans India and Bangladesh, enjoys apparent leverage vis-à-vis lower riparian India. During the monsoon, flooding has been the recurrent feature in the last several decades in Assam.
• India faces other woes in the form of the construction of dams by China. China’s excessive water release, as a “dam controller”, in violation of customary international law has the potential to exacerbate flooding in Assam in future.
• India’s main concern is that there is no comprehensive sub-basin or all basin-level mechanism to deal with water management of Brahmaputra.
• Neither India or China are party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses (UNWC) 1997 or the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes 1992 (Water Convention).

 

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses (UNWC):

• The UNWC contains a direct reference to floods, which covers harmful conditions and emergency situations.
• Article 27 of the Convention says: “Watercourse States shall, individually and, where appropriate, jointly, take all appropriate measures to prevent or mitigate conditions ...that may be harmful to other watercourse States, whether resulting from natural causes or human conduct, such as floods or ice conditions, water-borne diseases, siltation, erosion, salt-water intrusion, drought or desertification.”

 

MoU between India & China:

• In the absence of any mechanism, India relies on its memorandum of understanding (MoU) with China in 2013 with a view to sharing hydrological information during the flood season (June to September).
• The MoU does not allow India access to urbanisation and deforestation activities on the Chinese side of the river basin.
• With the MoU in the background, India by becoming a party to either the UNWC and the Water Convention could lay the groundwork for a bilateral treaty on the Brahmaputra but subject to the reservation that it should not insist on the insertion of a dispute settlement mechanism provision.

 

India, Nepal and flood prevention

• Floods are also a recurrent problem in the Koshi and Gandak river basins that are shared by India and Nepal.
• The intensity and magnitude of flooding is rising because of heavy seasonal precipitation as well as glacial retreat due to global warming and human-induced stressors such as land use and land cover changes in the river basin area of Nepal (Terai) and Bihar.
• It is important that the two neighbours view the river basins as single entities, which will help in facilitating an integrated approach for improved basin and flood risk management.

 

India-Nepal Koshi agreement 1954:

• The India-Nepal Koshi agreement 1954 (revised in 1966) is aimed at reducing devastating flooding in the river basin.
• The treaty-based joint bodies have also tried to refine the early warning systems for flood forecasting.

Way Forward:

• In contravention of procedural customary international law obligation, India considers data on transboundary rivers as classified information, which is one of the key challenges in developing cross-border flood warning systems.
• In light of the cataclysmic floods in Pakistan and the visible effects of climate change, it is important that all riparian states must comply with all the procedural duties pursuant to the no harm rule. They must also think of becoming a party to either the UNWC or the UNECE Water Convention.