India needs to change course to curb air pollution: World Bank study (GS Paper 3, Environment)
Why in news?
- Recently, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) released a study titled, “Striving for Clean Air: Air Pollution and Public Health in South Asia”.
- Terming air pollution as a public health crisis for South Asia, the report highlights that this crisis not only imposes high economic costs but also cause nearly 2 million premature deaths each year.
PM2.5:
- Making a case for revisiting the current approach in combating air pollution in South Africa, the report states that the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Air Quality Guideline recommends that concentrations of PM2.5 should not exceed an annual average of 5 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).
- According to the report, in South Asia, nearly 60 per cent of the population lives in areas where concentrations of PM2.5 exceed an annual mean of 35 μg/m3.
- In the densely populated Indo-Gangetic Plain, it is over 20 times the level that the WHO considers healthy (100 μg/m3 in several locations.
Causes of Air pollution inIndia:
- For India, the report points that the main causes of air pollution are unique to the largest country in South Asia.
- Solid fuel combustion in the residential sector for cooking and heating; small industries, including brick kilns; burning high-emission solid fuels; the current management practices of municipal waste in the region, including burning plastics; the inefficient application of mineral fertilizer; fireworks; and human cremation, are among the causes of Air pollution that are unique to India.
- Agriculture remains a significant contributor to polluting air by generating secondary particulate matter in the form of ammonia (NH₃) emissions from imbalanced fertilizer use and livestock manure that reacts with nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO₂) gases from energy, industry, and transportation sources.
The six major airsheds identified by the report in South Asia where spatial interdependence in air quality is high are:
- West/Central Indo-Gangetic Plain- Punjab (Pakistan), Punjab (India), Haryana, part of Rajasthan, Chandigarh, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh
- Central/Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plain- Bihar, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Bangladesh
- Middle India- Odisha/Chhattisgarh
- Middle India- Eastern Gujarat/Western Maharashtra
- Northern/Central Indus River Plain- Pakistan, part of Afghanistan; and
- Southern Indus- Plain and further west: South Pakistan, Western Afghanistan extending into Eastern Iran.
Challenges:
- The air quality policy measures currently in place as of 2018 can have a significant impact on the trajectory of air pollution in South Asia, if fully implemented and effectively enforced.
- For example, primary fine particulate matter (such as soot and mineral dust) would decline by 4 per cent rather than grow by 12 per cent between 2018 and 2030, region wide.
- However, the report explains that even if all technically feasible measures were fully implemented, parts of South Asia would still not be able to meet the WHO Interim Target on their own by 2030 because of the spatial interdependence of air quality.
Roadmap:
- The report acknowledged that progress has been made in legislation and planning for AQM, but states that South Asia is not ontrack to reach even the modest WHO Interim Target. The report calls for action and gives a three phased approach to achieve targets.
- In first phase, it recommends steps for more and better monitoring and improved institutions.
- For this it recommends widespread installation of sensors and the data sharing; Creation of credible scientific institutes that analyze airsheds; decentralised scientific capacity and a strong role of ministries of the environment that is complemented with a whole-of-government approach.
- In the second phase, the report states that once the focus broadens beyond cities, other emissions, which are important especially in South Asia, can be reduced.
- These include emissions from solid fuel use in households, from brick kilns and ovens in other small industries, from agriculture, and from open burning of solid municipal waste.
- The reports calls for mainstreaming air quality in the economy in the third phase. In this phase, the study makes a case for taxation of activities that release pollutants to make cleaner technologies more competitive. Along with this it calls for creating markets for emission-permit trading.
Citizenship path to be eased for 6 minority groups from 3 nations
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)
Why in news?
- The Centre is all set to ease the citizenship process for minorities from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh who entered India on valid documents, but whose passports and visas have since expired.
Details:
Challenges:
- For a Pakistani Hindu who entered India in 2010, the online system does not accept the expired passport, leading to the application not being accepted.
- The person or family has to then rush to the Pakistani High Commission in Delhi who charge a hefty sum to renew the passports and sometimes reject it on flimsy grounds.
- Even though the person is eligible to get Indian citizenship under the 1955 Act, as he or she has spent around 12 years in India, they face hurdles.
Amendment:
- In 2015, MHA amended the Citizenship Rules and legalised the stay of foreign migrants belonging to these six communities who entered India on or before December 31, 2014 due to religious persecution, by exempting them from the provisions of the Passport Act and the Foreigners Act even as their passports expired.
- Though they were exempt from facing any criminal action for illegally staying in India, the online portal still does not accept the expired documents to process their citizenship applications.
- People seeking Indian citizenship either come on long term visas (LTV) or pilgrim visas. LTVs given for five years are considered a precursor to citizenship.
Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019:
What’s next?
- There are 18,000 registered Pakistani Hindus who await citizenship.
- The MHA has also delegated powers to grant Indian citizenship by registration or naturalisation, in respect of the six minority communities who entered India on valid passports and visas, to district collectors of 31 districts and the Home Secretaries of nine States.
- As many as 2,439 LTVs were granted by the MHA for minority communities between March and December 2021. Of these, 2,193 were from Pakistan, 237 from Afghanistan, and nine from Bangladesh.
Deepfake technology how and why China is planning to regulate it
(GS Paper 3, Science and Tech)
Why in news?
- The Cyberspace Administration of China is rolling out new regulations, to be effective from January 10, to restrict the use of deep synthesis technology and curb disinformation.
- Deep synthesis is defined as the use of technologies, including deep learning and augmented reality, to generate text, images, audio and video to create virtual scenes.
- Under the guidelines of China’s new rules, companies and platforms using the technology must first receive consent from individuals before they edit their voice or image.
What is a deepfake?
What is China’s new policy to curb deepfakes?
- The policy requires deep synthesis service providers and users to ensure that any doctored content using the technology is explicitly labelled and can be traced back to its source, the South China Morning Post reported.
- The regulation also mandates people using the technology to edit someone’s image or voice, to notify and take the consent of the person in question. When reposting news made by the technology, the source can only be from the government-approved list of news outlets.
- Deep synthesis service providers must also abide by local laws, respect ethics, and maintain the “correct political direction and correct public opinion orientation.
Why has such a policy been implemented?
- Chinawas concerned that unchecked development and use of deep synthesis could lead to its use in criminal activities like online scams or defamation.
- The country’s recent move aims to curb risks that might arise from activities provided by platforms which use deep learning or virtual reality to alter any online content.
- If successful, China’s new policies could set an example and lay down a policy framework that other nations can follow.
What are other countries doing to combat deepfakes?
- The European Union has an updated Code of Practice to stop the spread of disinformation through deepfakes. The revised Code requires tech companies including Google, Meta, and Twitter to take measures in countering deepfakes and fake accounts on their platforms.
- They have six months to implement their measures once they have signed up to the Code. If found non-compliant, these companies can face fines as much as 6% of their annual global turnover, according to the updated Code.
- Introduced in 2018, the Code of Practice on Disinformation brought together for the first time worldwide industry players to commit to counter disinformation.
- The Code of Practice was signed in October 2018 by online platforms Facebook, Google, Twitter and Mozilla, as well as by advertisers and other players in the advertising industry. Microsoft joined in May 2019, while TikTok signed the Code in June 2020.
- However, the assessment of the Code revealed important gaps and hence the Commission has issued a Guidance on updating and strengthening the Code in order to bridge the gaps. The Code’s revision process was completed in June 2022.
U.S.
- In July 2021, the U.S. introduced the bipartisan Deepfake Task Force Act to assist the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to counter deepfake technology.
- The measure directs the DHS to conduct an annual study of deepfakes — assess the technology used, track its uses by foreign and domestic entities, and come up with available countermeasures to tackle the same.
Does this technology disrupt the right to privacy?
- While Canada does not have any regulations to tackle deepfakes, it is in a unique position to lead the initiative to counter deepfakes.
- Within Canada, some of the most cutting-edge AI research is being conducted by the government with a number of domestic and foreign actors.
- Furthermore, Canada is a member and leader in many related multilateral initiatives like the Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace, NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence and the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence.
- It can use these forums to coordinate with global and domestic actors to create deepfake policy in different areas.
Bilkis Banos plea rejected by SC What is a review petition
(GS Paper 2, Judiciary)
Why in news?
- Recently, the Supreme Court has dismissed a petition filed by 2002 Gujarat riots victim Bilkis Bano, seeking review of its May 2022 order which said the Gujarat government was the appropriate government to decide the prayer for remission by one of the 11 convicts handed life terms in her case, and let the state’s 1992 remission policy apply in the matter.
Article 137:
- According to the Constitution, any ruling by the Supreme Court is in the normal course final and binding, and it becomes the law of the land. It is considered final because it provides certainty for deciding future cases.
- However, the Constitution also gives, under Article 137, the Supreme Court the power to review its judgments or orders. This provision forms the legal basis for the filing of a “review petition”.
Procedure for review:
- A review petition must be filed within 30 days of pronouncement of the judgment. Except in cases of death penalty, review petitions are heard through “circulation” by judges in their chambers. They are usually not heard in open court.
- Lawyers in review petitions usually make their case through written submissions, and not oral arguments. The same judges who passed the original verdict usually also hear the review petition.
- It is not necessary that only parties to a case can seek a review of the judgment on it. As per the Civil Procedure Code and the Supreme Court Rules, any person aggrieved by a ruling can seek a review. However, the court does not entertain every review petition filed.
- In Bilkis Bano’s case, Bilkis, through her advocate Shobha Gupta, had herself sought the review.
Grounds for review:
- There are narrow, specific grounds on which a review petition can be entertained. Therefore, the court has the power to review its rulings to correct a “patent error” but not “minor mistakes of inconsequential import”.
- In a 1975 ruling, Justice Krishna Iyer said a review can be accepted “only where a glaring omission or patent mistake or like grave error has crept in earlier by judicial fallibility”.
- In a 2013 ruling, the Supreme Court laid down three grounds for seeking a review of a verdict it has delivered:
- the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the petitioner or could not be produced by him;
- a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; or
- any other sufficient reason. In subsequent rulings, the court specified that “any sufficient reason” means a reason that is analogous to the other two grounds.
- In another 2013 ruling (Union of India v. Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd), the court laid down nine principles on when a review is maintainable. It added that the mere possibility of two views on the subject cannot be a ground for review.
Success of review pleas:
- It is rare for the Supreme Court to either admit reviews or to overturn an original decision in a review.
- It did agree to review its 2018 verdict in the Sabarimala case, but refused to review its ruling seeking a probe into the Rafale deal.
Curative petition:
- As the court of last resort, the Supreme Court’s verdict cannot result in a miscarriage of justice. So, in Roopa Hurra v Ashok Hurra (2002), the court itself evolved the concept of a curative petition, which can be heard after a review is dismissed to prevent abuse of its process.
- A curative petition is also entertained on very narrow grounds like a review petition, and is generally not granted an oral hearing. It is yet to be seen if Bilkis Bano will take this route.
