Whatsapp 93125-11015 For Details
The four-month window to exchange or deposit ₹2,000 currency notes opened with small queues and confusion at some banks over the requirement of identity cards such as PAN or Aadhaar, and requisition slips.
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on May 19 announced withdrawal of ₹2,000 notes from circulation in pursuance of its ‘Clean Note Policy’.
It advised the public to deposit such notes into their bank accounts or exchange them for notes of other denominations at any bank branch, up to a limit of ₹20,000 at a time, by September 30.
While the RBI has not made the presentation of a valid ID or filling of deposit forms mandatory, there were complaints from some places that banks were asking customers to submit identity cards as proof.
Scores of people lined up outside banks in Delhi as the temperature hovered around 43 degrees Celsius. Chaos and confusion prevailed over the process of exchange, which left people, especially the elderly, disgruntled. Nearly 100 people turned up at a Union Bank branch in Connaught Place.
Manoj Kumar, a customer of HDFC bank, said though he wanted to exchange 20 notes, he was asked to give only 10 by the bank staff.
India-Australia ties built on trust: Modi (Page no. 1)
(GS Paper 2, International Relation)
Prime Minister Narendra Modi said the foundation of India-Australia relations lies in mutual trust and respect, as he along with his Australian counterpart Anthony Albanese addressed the Indian diaspora at a mega event here.
During the event, a suburb in Australia — Harris Park — was renamed “Little India”, reflecting the strong bond between the two strategic partners.
Mr. Modi also announced that India would open a consulate in Brisbane to fulfil a long-pending demand by the diaspora. The Prime Minister was given a rousing welcome by thousands of Indians who thronged the Qudos Bank Arena.
Mr. Albanese described India as a “force of global good” and a “bright spot” in the world economy.
Update NPR to enumerate self during next Census (Page no. 1)
(GS Paper 1, Indian Society)
If citizens want to exercise the right to fill the Census form on their own rather than through government enumerators, they will have to first update their National Population Register (NPR) details online.
The NPR, first put together in 2010 and updated in 2015, already has the details of 119 crore people.
Census 2021, which has been postponed indefinitely, will be the first digital Census giving citizens an opportunity to “self-enumerate” as and when it is conducted.
The government has not announced when the next census will be held, with a January 2 notification ruling out the exercise at least till September. The Census is conducted in two phases.
Editorial
Justice that also makes space for animal welfare (Page no. 10)
(GS Paper 2, Governance)
Consider this example, from the philosopher Martha Nussbaum’s book, Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility.
An animal, Susan, goes about her life, doing all the things that an animal of Susan’s sort would. But while pursuing her goals, she runs into various hurdles, a few frivolous, and unimportant to her life, and a few that are more serious — an illness, a storm that wrecks her home, and so forth.
So far, it is clear that while Susan has met with problems, she has not suffered injustice. But, say, just as Susan is going about her business, another creature encroaches on her space, stops her from reaching her goals.
Nussbaum says, if Susan were a human being, it would be apparent to us that she had suffered injustice.
If we were to see the law as a way of achieving justice, one would think that our ideation of constitutional rights will partake a commitment to welfare not just of human beings, but of other animals too.
No doubt the text of the Constitution, the rights that it guarantees, are aimed at “persons”. To confer personhood on animals will unquestionably bring with it various vexing quandaries.
Is there not enough room available within the abstract guarantees of the Constitution for a more enlightened approach to animal welfare?
The paradox of BRICS, its new pathway (Page no. 10)
(GS Paper 2, International Organisation)
Mysterious are the ways in which multilateral groupings prosper and wither away. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and G-77 had their heyday in the Cold War era.
Later they lost their relevance, but they still exist. The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summits ended in 2014, but the Secretariat somehow keeps itself busy.
Despite serious policy divergences on China and Myanmar, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) continues to function, consuming reams of paper to issue long communiqués.
The case of BRICS is truly remarkable. Despite several achievements, it began to lose its sparkle. COVID-19, the Galwan clash, and the Ukraine conflict resulted in increased global economic stress, damaged India-China ties, and turned Russia into a diminishing power.
The group may have lost its mojo, but numerous nations want to be admitted, thus showing the paradox of BRICS.
Jim O’Neil’s conception of BRIC, a grouping of four emerging economies (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), may not have gone far but it was a popular acronym over two decades ago.
However, two of its components joined hands with South Africa to form IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) in 2003. China was keen to join it in the century’s first decade and managed to enlist South Africa’s support.
But Brazil and India would not go along, maintaining that the forum was open to democracies only. Rebuffed, China played a trump card, and decided to bring South Africa into BRIC, thus turning it into BRICS.
Soon, the new club overshadowed the old one. IBSA has been unable to hold its summit since 2011. But BRICS has held 14 summits in the past 13 years.
Opinion
Disregarding Constitution, court, citizens (Page no. 11)
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Constitution)
In the last 10 days, we have witnessed both the emancipation and subversion of the people’s will. The emancipation was at the hands of the Supreme Court, where a five-judge Bench unanimously recognised the control of the Delhi government over administrative services.
The subversion was at the hands of the Central government, which, by promulgating an ordinance to nullify the effect of the Supreme Court judgment, snatched away the Delhi government’s power to control services and handed it to Central government appointees.
The story began in 2015, when the Union Ministry of Home Affairs took away the elected Delhi government’s control over services and gave it to the Lieutenant Governor (LG), a Union government appointee.
This severely impeded the Delhi government’s work. There were day-to-day problems in the functioning of important departments as secretaries were changed every now and then.
Frequent transfers of officials, before they could even familiarise themselves with the departments they were working in, minimised any potential for vision, consistency and efficiency in governance.
Over two years of the pandemic, the Centre changed Delhi’s Health Secretary eight times and derailed the Delhi government’s relief efforts.
Over the past one and a half years, decisions for appointments and transfers were made by the Services Secretary, the Chief Secretary, and the LG, while the elected government was kept in the dark.
As the government had no functional control, it could not punish errant officers. Delhi witnessed the highest number of vacancies of teachers, doctors, engineers, clerks and other staff as a result of perennial mismanagement of the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, managed by the LG.
Most disappointingly, several honest and efficient officials were often penalised for their merits and subjected to punishment postings. They had no clarity on whose directions they were to follow.
On the one hand, they felt duty-bound to honour the will of the people expressed through the elected government, and on the other hand, they had to stay under the functional control of the LG.
Text & Context
The Telangana- A.P. water dispute (Page no. 12)
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Constitution)
The nagging dispute over the water share of the Krishna river between Andhra Pradesh (A.P.) and Telangana remains unresolved, even nine years after the bifurcation of the combined State.
The dispute dates back to the formation of Andhra Pradesh in November, 1956. Before the formation of Andhra Pradesh, four senior leaders each from different regions of Andhra, including the Rayalaseema Region and the Telangana region, signed a Gentlemen’s Agreement on February 20, 1956.
Among others, one of the provisions of the agreement was the protection of Telangana’s interests and needs with respect to the utilisation of water resources with equitable distribution based on treaties followed globally.
However, the focus of the combined dispensation with respect to irrigation facilities was on Andhra, which already had systems developed by the British at the cost of in-basin drought-prone areas in Telangana — a fact which was argued by the leaders of the latter region from the beginning.
Further on, in 1969, the Bachawat Tribunal (KWDT-I) was constituted to settle the dispute around water share among the riparian States of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh (before bifurcation).
The Tribunal allocated 811 tmcft dependable water to Andhra Pradesh. The A.P. government later apportioned it in the 512:299 tmcft ratio between Andhra (including parts of Rayalaseema which comprise the Krishna Basin) and Telangana, respectively, based on the command area developed or utilisation mechanism established by then.
The Tribunal had also recommended taking the Tungabhadra Dam ( a part of the Krishna Basin) water to the drought-prone Mahabubnagar area of Telangana.
However, this was not followed through, giving birth to discontent among the people. Telangana had time and again reiterated how it had been meted out with injustice in Andhra Pradesh when it came to the matter of distributing water resources.
What is the EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism? (Page no. 12)
(GS Paper 3, Environment)
On May 10, co-legislators at the European Commission signed the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). It has been described as a “landmark tool” to put a “fair price on the carbon emitted during the production of carbon intensive goods that are entering the EU, and to encourage cleaner industrial production in non-EU countries.”
Its primary objective is to avert ‘carbon leakage’. It refers to a phenomenon where a EU manufacturer moves carbon-intensive production to countries outside the region with less stringent climate policies. In other words, replace EU-manufactured products with more carbon-intensive imports.
From 2026, once the CBAM is fully implemented, importers in the EU would have to buy carbon certificates corresponding to the payable carbon price of the import had the product been produced in the continent, under its carbon pricing rules.
Conversely, if a non-EU producer is paying a price (or tax) for carbon used to produce the imported goods, back home or in some other country, the corresponding cost would be deducted for the EU importer.
The Commission, in coordination with relevant authorities of the member states, would be responsible for reviewing and verifying declarations as well as managing the central platform for the sale of CBAM certificates.
Importers would have to annually declare by May-end the quantity and embedded emissions in the goods imported into the region in the preceding year.
The idea here is to avert the possibility of carbon leakage alongside encouraging producers in non-EU countries to green their manufacturing processes. Moreover, it will ensure a level playing field between imports and EU products.
This would also form part of the continent’s broader European Green Deal which endeavours to achieve 55% reduction in carbon emissions compared to 1990 levels by 2030 and become a climate neutral continent by 2050.
News
India provides key railway infrastructure to Bangladesh (Page no. 14)
(GS Paper 2, International Relation)
To further strengthen bilateral relationship between India and Bangladesh, the Ministry of Railways in India handed over 20 broad- gauge locomotives to its eastern neighbour.
Railway Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said the government had also offered Bangladesh the use of the IT system deployed by PM-GATI SHAKTI scheme, which has 1,600 layers of information based on satellite imagery.
The information which can be accessed layer by layer pinpoints exact location of rivers, forests, towns and rail links; so planning can be streamlined.
In keeping with the requirements of Bangladesh Railway, the locomotives have been suitably modified by the Indian side.
These locomotives will help handle the increasing volume of passenger and freight train operations in Bangladesh, a Railways spokesperson said. In June 2020, India had provided 10 locomotives to Bangladesh as grant.
The Indian Railways is playing a vital role in improving and strengthening rail connectivity across the border and improving trade between both the countries.
Trade between the countries via rail has seen a consistent growth with interchange of close to 100 cargo trains a month. Approximately 2.66 tonnes of cargo was sent to Bangladesh in the previous financial year.
Business
Draft of Digital India Bill to be released in June: Minister (Page no. 18)
(GS Paper 3, Internal Security)
A full-fledged draft of the Digital India Bill, set to be the biggest revamp of laws governing the Internet in India since the Information Technology Act, 2000, and subsequent amendments, will be published in the first week of June, Minister of State for Electronics and Information Technology Rajeev Chandrasekhar said in Mumbai.
The idea is certainly to have this done in this calendar year,” Mr. Chandrasekhar said, indicating that the government aims to pass the law by the winter session of Parliament.
He noted that much of the law will be a ‘framework’ based on foundational principles, following which the Act would be “regulated through rules”.
The minister pointed favourably to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s testimony to U.S. Congress, where the executive behind ChatGPT pushed for limits on use of artificial intelligence (AI).
Our approach right now in the draft is about regulating [AI] through the prism of user harm,” the minister noted.
“So we will say these are the ‘no go areas’ for these technologies.
That is our thinking at the moment,” Mr. Chandrasekhar said. The approach would be to create “guardrails” for high risk AI systems.