Current Affairs Reverse Engineering- CARE (15-11-2024)
| News at a Glance |
| International Relations: Dominica to bestow its highest national honour to PM Modi |
| All about MATES, a new scheme for young Indians to work in Australia |
| Economy: No dual eco-clearance for 39 categories of industry |
| Polity and Governance: Centre reimposes AFSPA in six police station limits in Manipur |
| Supreme Court’s order on mandatory accessibility standards, why it matters |
Dominica to bestow its highest national honour to PM Modi
Source: The Hindu
UPSC Syllabus Relevance: GS2 International Relations:
Context: Dominica Award of Honour
Why in News
- Dominica is honoring PM Narendra Modi with its highest national award, ‘Dominica Award of Honour, for his support during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Overview
- The Commonwealth of Dominica’s highest national honor, the Dominica Award of Honour, is set to be conferred upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, recognizing his impactful contributions to Dominica during the COVID-19 pandemic and his commitment to bolstering the partnership between India and Dominica.
- This award represents Dominica’s most prestigious tribute, highlighting significant contributions to the nation’s development, as decided by the President of Dominica.
- In the past, this award has been bestowed upon notable figures, such as Cuban leader Fidel Castro, for their remarkable service to Dominica.
Reasons for Awarding Prime Minister Narendra Modi
- A press release from the Prime Minister’s Office of Dominica elaborated
- on the support provided by India under PM Modi’s leadership, especially in healthcare, education, and information technology sectors.
- Specifically, in February 2021, Prime Minister Modi supplied 70,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine to Dominica.
- This shipment of vaccines was critical in assisting Dominica’s efforts to curb the pandemic, providing essential support for the country’s healthcare response during a critical period.
The Dominica Award of Honour
- The Dominica Award of Honour is awarded by the President of Dominica to individuals who have rendered distinguished service contributing to the progress of the Commonwealth of Dominica. Each sitting President of Dominica automatically receives the award, which stands as a testament to their leadership role.
- This honor highlights individuals or leaders from various countries who have made a significant impact on Dominica, whether in governance, international relations, or humanitarian assistance.
The Upcoming India-CARICOM Summit
- In November 2024, the President of Dominica, Sylvanie Burton, along with Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit, will participate in the India-CARICOM Summit. This summit aims to deepen cooperation between India and CARICOM (Caribbean Community) member states, exploring new channels for collaboration and partnership. Key areas of focus at the summit will include:
- Healthcare: Expanding on initiatives like the COVID-19 vaccine support, enhancing healthcare infrastructure, and promoting medical collaborations.
- Education and Skill Development: Fostering educational exchange programs, scholarships, and digital literacy initiatives to improve access to quality education.
- Information Technology and Digital Transformation: Encouraging digital growth, tech-enabled services, and digital skills development to drive economic progress.
- Trade and Investment: Exploring avenues for trade and investment between India and CARICOM nations, focusing on mutual economic growth.
- Sustainable Development: Collaborating on issues like climate change, renewable energy, and sustainable agricultural practices, addressing shared challenges facing the Caribbean region.
India’s Growing Relationship with the Caribbean
- India’s engagement with CARICOM reflects a broader diplomatic effort to establish a stronger presence in the Caribbean, focusing on shared interests in development and addressing global challenges.
- The summit will provide India and CARICOM members with an opportunity to explore strategic initiatives, strengthening ties that can lead to tangible outcomes across healthcare, technology, and economic development.
| CARE MCQ | UPSC PYQ |
| Q1. Consider the following statements regarding the Dominica Award of Honour:
1. The Dominica Award of Honour is the highest national award bestowed by the Prime Minister of Dominica. 2. Prime Minister of India is being awarded the Dominica Award of Honour in recognition of his assistance to Dominica during the COVID-19 pandemic. 3. The Dominica Award of Honour has previously been awarded to Cuban leader Fidel Castro. Which of the statements given above are correct? (A) 1 and 2 only (B) 2 and 3 only (C) 1 and 3 only (D) 1, 2, and 3 |
Q. Consider the following statements in respect of Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards. (2021)
1. Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards are titles under the Article 18(1) of the Constitution of India. 2. Padma Awards, which were instituted in the year 1954, were suspended only once. 3. The number of Bharat Ratna Awards is restricted to a maximum of five in a particular year. Which of the above statements are not correct? (a) 1 and 2 (b) 2 and 3 (c) 1 and 3 (d) 1, 2 and 3 Ans. (d)
|
| Answer – 1 – B
Explanation – · Statement 1 is incorrect because the Dominica Award of Honour is bestowed by the President of Dominica, not the Prime Minister. · Statement 2 is correct; PM Narendra Modi is receiving the award for his contributions during the COVID-19 pandemic. · Statement 3 is correct; Cuban leader Fidel Castro has previously received this award. · Therefore, option B is the correct answer. |
All about MATES, a new scheme for young Indians to work in Australia
Source: Indian Express
UPSC Relevance: GS 2 International Relations
Context: Australia’s Mobility Arrangement for Talented Early-professionals Scheme (MATES)
Why in News
- Australia’s MATES scheme enables young Indian professionals to work in Australia for two years, promoting skill development in key sectors without employer sponsorship requirements.
Overview
- The Mobility Arrangement for Talented Early-professionals Scheme (MATES) is an Australian initiative designed to allow skilled young professionals from India to work in Australia for two years.
- This scheme supports career development for young Indian professionals and strengthens bilateral ties between India and Australia.
- MATES falls under the broader Migration and Mobility Partnership Arrangement (MMPA), a framework agreed upon by Australia and India on May 23, 2023, aimed at promoting migration and addressing illegal migration issues.
Eligibility Criteria for MATES
To apply for MATES, candidates must meet specific requirements:
- Age: Must be 30 or younger at the time of application.
- Educational Background: Must have graduated within the last two years from an eligible Indian university.
- English Proficiency: Requires a minimum IELTS score of 6 overall, with no individual module score below 5.
- Field of Study: The degree must be in one of the following fields:
- Renewable Energy
- Mining
- Engineering
- Information Communications Technology (ICT)
- Artificial Intelligence (AI)
- Financial Technology (FinTech)
- Agricultural Technology (AgriTech)
- Eligible Institutions: Only graduates from the top 100 Indian universities, as ranked by the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) 2024, can apply. This includes institutions like Panjab University, Chandigarh University, Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, and Lovely Professional University from Punjab.
No Requirement for Employer Sponsorship
- MATES participants do not need sponsorship from an Australian employer.
- This aspect of the scheme provides flexibility for young professionals to explore various opportunities and expand their skills without being tied to a specific job or employer.
Key Benefits of MATES
- Two-Year Stay in Australia: Participants can live and work in Australia for up to two years, with the flexibility to switch between jobs and explore various sectors.
- Sector-Specific Skill Development: The scheme promotes professional growth by allowing participants to work and gain experience in Australia’s thriving industries, particularly those aligned with their fields of study.
- Work Rights for Dependents: Dependents (spouses and dependent children) accompanying the primary visa holder will have full work rights in Australia and do not count towards the annual cap on MATES participants.
- Future Visa Opportunities: Participants can apply for a temporary or permanent visa to extend their stay, provided they meet the eligibility criteria.
Duration and Visa Validity
- First Entry Requirement: Visa holders have 12 months to make their initial entry into Australia.
- Stay Duration: Once entered, participants can remain in Australia for 24 months from the date of first entry.
- Multiple Entries: The visa allows multiple entries, providing flexibility for travel during the two-year stay.
Application Process: Ballot Selection
- MATES visas are granted through a ballot system, which randomly selects applicants to move forward in the process.
- A non-refundable application fee of AUD 25 is required for the ballot. Those selected will complete further visa formalities to finalize their participation in the scheme.
Program Capacity and Initial Rollout
- The MATES scheme will commence as a pilot with 3,000 places for primary applicants each year.
- This pilot phase will provide valuable insights for both governments to assess the scheme’s impact and explore further expansion.
| CARE MCQ | UPSC PYQ |
| Q2 With reference to Australia’s Mobility Arrangement for Talented Early-professionals Scheme (MATES), consider the following statements:
1. MATES is open to young professionals from India who have graduated from any university within the last five years. 2. This scheme allows Indian participants to live and work in Australia for up to two years without requiring sponsorship from an Australian employer. 3. MATES requires that applicants must have a minimum proficiency in the English language, demonstrated by an IELTS score. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? A. 1 and 2 only |
Q. Which one of the following statements best reflects the issue with Senkaku Islands, sometimes mentioned in the news? (2022)
a) It is generally believed that they are artificial islands made by a country around South China Sea. b) China and Japan engage in maritime disputes over these islands in East China Sea. c) A permanent American military base has been set up there to help Taiwan to increase its defence capabilities. d) Though International Court of Justice declared them as no man’s land, some South-East Asian countries claim them. Ans b |
| Answer 2– B
Explanation – · Statement 1 is incorrect because MATES is only open to recent graduates who have graduated within the last two years from an eligible institution. · Statement 2 is correct, as the scheme does not require employer sponsorship. · Statement 3 is correct, as applicants need a minimum IELTS score to demonstrate English proficiency. · Therefore, option B is the correct answer. |
No dual eco-clearance for 39 categories of industry
Source: The Hindu
UPSC Relevance: GS 3 Economy
Context: Exemption for ‘White Category’ Industries from Pollution Control Permits
Why in News
- The Union Environment Ministry has exempted 39 low-pollution ‘white category’ industries from needing permissions from State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) to operate.
The Scarborough Shoal Dispute
- The Union Environment Ministry has exempted 39 low-pollution ‘white category’ industries from needing permissions from State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) to operate.
- The aim is to streamline processes for industries that pose minimal environmental risk, thereby supporting “ease of doing business” and reducing compliance burdens on certain sectors.
Categories of Industries by Pollution Level
According to the Central Pollution Control Board’s (CPCB) 2016 classification, industries are categorized by pollution level into Red, Orange, Green, and White categories:
- Red: The most polluting, requiring stringent monitoring.
- Orange: Moderately polluting, requiring significant oversight.
- Green: Less polluting, with lighter regulations.
- White: The least polluting, requiring minimal regulatory oversight.
White category industries include sectors such as:
- Solar cell and module manufacturing
- Wind and hydropower units
- Fly ash brick/block manufacturing
- Leather cutting and stitching
- Air cooler/conditioner assembly and repair
Since these industries have minimal environmental impact, they were already often granted permissions by state departments without rigorous scrutiny.
Previous Compliance Requirements
Before this notification, even white category industries had to secure:
- Environmental Clearance (EC) from the Union Environment Ministry.
- Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO) from the respective SPCB.
This meant industries had to undergo dual compliance, facing added regulatory hurdles and potential delays. The new exemption policy eliminates the need for CTE and CTO for white category industries, effectively removing these permissions for these sectors.
Rationale for the Exemption
The government argues that:
- Dual compliance was redundant for low-risk industries.
- Eliminating CTE and CTO requirements will lower administrative burdens, reduce duplication, and promote ease of doing business.
- The notification formalizes an existing practice where white category industries generally received permits with minimal requirements.
Recent Amendments to the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
- This exemption also aligns with recent amendments to the Water Act earlier in 2024, which have shifted some regulatory power from SPCBs to the central government.
- The Water Act was initially established to prevent water pollution, leading to the creation of SPCBs and the CPCB for regulation and enforcement.
Changes Brought by the Water Act Amendments
The amendments grant the central government greater authority to overrule SPCB decisions in certain cases. According to the original Act, SPCB permission was needed for:
- Setting up any industry or plant discharging sewage into water bodies or land.
The amendments are part of a push to update outdated rules to reduce regulatory bottlenecks and promote a pro-business environment.
Rationale Presented in Parliament: Environment Minister Bhupendra Yadav emphasized that:
- Outdated rules created a “trust deficit” between the government and industry.
- Imprisonment for minor environmental violations led to “harassment” and did not align with the government’s vision for “ease of living” and “ease of doing business.”
| CARE MCQ | UPSC PYQ |
| Q3. With reference to the recent exemption by the Union Environment Ministry for certain industries from pollution control permits, consider the following statements:
1. The exemption applies to industries categorized as ‘White’ under the pollution classification by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). 2. Industries in the ‘White’ category are required to obtain Environmental Clearance (EC) but are exempt from obtaining Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO). 3. The ‘White’ category of industries includes sectors such as solar cell manufacturing, wind power units, and leather cutting. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? A. 1 and 2 only |
Q. In India, which one of the following compiles information on industrial disputes, closures, retrenchments and lay-offs in factories employing workers? (2022)
a) Central Statistics Office b) Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade c) Labour Bureau d) National Technical Manpower Information System Ans: c |
| Answer 3– C
Explanation – · Statement 1 is correct as the exemption applies specifically to ‘White’ category industries as per CPCB’s classification. · Statement 2 is incorrect because while Environmental Clearance (EC) is required, ‘White’ category industries are exempt from both CTE and CTO. · Statement 3 is correct as examples of white category industries include solar cell manufacturing, wind power units, and leather cutting. · Therefore, option C is the correct answer. |
Centre reimposes AFSPA in six police station limits in Manipur
Source: The Hindu
UPSC Relevance: GS 2 Polity and Governance
Context: Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA)
Why in News
- The Union Ministry of Home Affairs reimposed the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) in six police station limits across five districts of Manipur due to ongoing ethnic violence and insurgent activities.
Overview
- The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), a legislation that grants sweeping powers to the armed forces to maintain public order in regions identified as “disturbed areas,” has been reimposed in certain parts of Manipur by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).
- This decision comes in the wake of ongoing ethnic violence in the state, particularly between the Meitei people, who inhabit the valley regions, and the tribal Kuki-Zo-Hmar communities, who primarily live in the hill districts.
Background and Context:
- AFSPA Overview: AFSPA allows the military to operate in areas classified as disturbed, giving them powers such as:
- To shoot and arrest without warrant.
- To enter and search premises without a warrant.
- To destroy arms or explosives believed to be used by insurgents.
- To use force, including lethal force, to maintain public order.
- The law also allows military personnel to act without the prior approval of a magistrate, which has raised concerns over human rights violations.
- Previous Withdrawal of AFSPA: The state government of Manipur had previously withdrawn AFSPA from several areas, including the valley regions of the state in April 2022, citing a decline in insurgent activities and improved public security. This move was part of the government’s effort to foster peace and normalcy after years of violent insurgencies in the state. However, this withdrawal has now been reversed due to the resurgence of violence and growing security concerns.
- Reimposition of AFSPA: On November 14, 2024, the MHA issued a notification declaring six police station limits across five districts as “disturbed areas,” thereby reintroducing the provisions of AFSPA. The areas affected include:
- Sekmai and Lamsang in Imphal West district.
- Lamlai in Imphal East district.
- Jiribam in Jiribam district.
- Moirang in Bishnupur district.
- Leimakhong in Kangpokpi district.
These areas are primarily where the Meitei and Kuki-Zo populations overlap, creating areas of tension due to ethnic violence.
- Duration and Scope: The reimposition of AFSPA in these areas will be effective until March 31, 2025. The rationale behind this is to facilitate coordinated military operations aimed at curbing the activities of insurgent groups. These operations would be crucial in areas that have seen increasing insurgency and violence. The MHA has also noted the continuous threat posed by armed groups, with instances of violence and active insurgent participation in the unrest.
Security Situation:
- Ethnic Violence: The violence, which began in May 2023, has seen over 240 deaths, with both Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities suffering significant casualties. The recent wave of violence since November 7, 2024, has claimed additional lives, with reports of burning of individuals and kidnappings.
- Rise of Insurgents: There has been an increase in armed insurgent activities, particularly in the valley regions of Manipur, including extortion and abduction cases. This has intensified security concerns, leading to the decision to reimpose AFSPA.
Strategic Importance:
- Buffer Zones: The areas under focus are described as buffer zones or fringe areas, where both Meitei and Kuki-Zo villages are located in close proximity. These are high-risk zones, where violence has escalated due to ethnic tensions.
- Military Operations: Under AFSPA, the Indian Army and Assam Rifles can now operate without waiting for state or magistrate assistance, facilitating more swift and coordinated operations against insurgent groups. This is especially important in areas where insurgents often take advantage of jurisdictional lapses.
- Overview
Legislative and Administrative Developments:
- Review of Security Situation: The decision to reimpose AFSPA followed a security review by the MHA, which consulted local stakeholders. The volatile situation in regions like Bishnupur-Churachandpur, Imphal East-Kangpokpi, and Jiribam was a major factor in the decision.
- Earlier AFSPA Extensions: Prior to this, the Manipur government had extended AFSPA in all ten hill districts of the state, excluding specific areas. The state had also issued periodic extensions of AFSPA since 1972, when the law was first introduced.
- Challenges to Peace: There is an ongoing debate between the state and central governments over the exact jurisdiction and coverage of AFSPA, with different views on its extension. The central government’s authority to extend AFSPA may be counterbalanced by the state government’s decision-making power on specific areas.
Security Forces Deployment:
- Military Presence: A significant military deployment is in place to counter the ongoing insurgency. The deployment includes 140 columns of the army, with each column comprising up to 40 soldiers, along with 22,000 personnel from the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF). This highlights the scale of the operations required to stabilize the region.
Conclusion:
- The reimposition of AFSPA in parts of Manipur underscores the challenging security situation arising from ethnic violence and insurgent activities.
- While AFSPA aims to restore order by empowering the armed forces, it also raises concerns about human rights and the balance between security and personal freedoms.
- The government’s actions reflect a shift in priorities to deal with a volatile environment, but the long-term peace in the state hinges on addressing the root causes of the ethnic conflict and ensuring effective governance.
| CARE MCQ | UPSC PYQ |
| Q4. Which of the following statements is correct regarding the reimposition of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) in Manipur in November 2024?
1. The reimposition of AFSPA covers all 16 districts of Manipur. 2. AFSPA was reimposed in six police station limits across five districts of Manipur due to ongoing ethnic violence. 3. AFSPA was last revoked from the entire state of Manipur in 2023. 4. The notification for reimposition of AFSPA is valid for a period of one year. Select the correct answer from the options given below: A) 1 and 3 only
|
Q. With reference to ‘Scheduled Areas’ in India, consider the following statements: (2023)
1. Within a State, the notification of an area as Scheduled Area takes place through an Order of the President. 2. The largest administrative unit forming the Scheduled Area is the District and the lowest is the cluster of villages in the Block. 3. The Chief Ministers of the concerned States are required to submit annual reports to the Union Home Ministry on the administration of Scheduled Areas in the States. How many of the above statements are correct? a) Only one b) Only two c) All three d) None Ans: (b) |
| Answer 4- B
Explanation · Statement 1 is incorrect because the reimposition of AFSPA covers only six police station limits across five districts, not all 16 districts of Manipur. · Statement 2 is correct, as AFSPA was reimposed in six police station limits in five districts of Manipur due to ongoing ethnic violence. · Statement 3 is incorrect because AFSPA was revoked from these areas in April 2022, not from the entire state in 2023. · Statement 4 is correct because the reimposed AFSPA is valid until March 31, 2025. · Therefore, option B is the correct answer. |
Supreme Court’s order on mandatory accessibility standards, why it matters
Source: Indian Express
UPSC Syllabus Relevance: GS 2- Polity and Governance
Context: Supreme Court Judgment on Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities
Why in News
- The Supreme Court of India recently mandated the Union government to create mandatory rules for ensuring accessibility in public places and services for persons with disabilities.
Overview
- This judgment, led by outgoing Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, reinforces accessibility as a fundamental right under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016.
The Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016
- Purpose:
Enacted in line with India’s obligations under the United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the RPwD Act aims to provide persons with disabilities (PwDs) a life of dignity, non-discrimination, and equal opportunities. - CRPD Article 9 on Accessibility:
States must ensure accessibility to the physical environment, transportation, information and communication technologies, and public services to enable PwDs to live independently and participate in all aspects of life. - Rules of 2017:
These rules were meant to establish accessibility standards but were criticized for being self-regulatory guidelines rather than mandatory standards.
Supreme Court Judgment Highlights
- Background:
The judgment arose from a writ petition filed in 2005 by Rajive Raturi, a visually challenged individual, seeking safety and accessibility in public spaces. - Key Findings:
- The SC ruled that Rule 15(1) of the RPwD Rules of 2017 contravenes the RPwD Act by creating non-binding guidelines instead of compulsory standards. This rule was declared ultra vires (beyond the powers of) the Act.
- The SC emphasized that accessibility standards must be non-negotiable.
- Mandate to the Union Government:
- Frame mandatory rules within three months in consultation with stakeholders, including NALSAR’s Centre for Disability Studies.
- Ensure penalties for non-compliance, such as withholding completion certificates or imposing fines.
Gaps Identified by the NALSAR Report
- Lack of Uniform Standards:
- Accessibility guidelines across ministries (e.g., Indian Railways, Ministry of Ports) are inconsistent. For instance, port accessibility guidelines are illustrative but not exhaustive.
- Transport Accessibility:
- Accessibility varies significantly across states. For example:
- Delhi: 3,775 low-floor CNG buses available.
- Tamil Nadu: Only 1,917 buses out of 21,669 are accessible.
- Accessibility varies significantly across states. For example:
- Intersectional Disadvantages:
- The right to accessibility intersects with caste, gender, religion, and other factors. Examples include:
- Visually impaired individuals facing inaccessible job portals.
- Lack of sign language recognition for persons with hearing and speech impairments.
- The right to accessibility intersects with caste, gender, religion, and other factors. Examples include:
Implications of the Judgment
- Accessibility as a Fundamental Right:
The judgment reaffirms that accessibility is a basic human right, essential for ensuring dignity and equal opportunities. - Enforcement and Compliance:
- Mandatory accessibility standards will now have to be implemented nationwide.
- Central and state governments must enforce these standards through penalties for non-compliance.
- Broader Impact:
- The decision sets a precedent for framing legally binding accessibility guidelines.
- It emphasizes the need to address structural and systemic barriers faced by PwDs in public and private domains.
Conclusion
- The Supreme Court’s directive is a landmark step towards ensuring inclusive infrastructure and services for persons with disabilities in India.
- By mandating uniform, non-negotiable rules, the judgment strengthens the legislative framework of the RPwD Act, promoting a more accessible and equitable society.
- However, successful implementation will depend on strict enforcement, adequate funding, and continued stakeholder engagement.
| CARE MCQ | UPSC PYQ |
Q5. Consider the following statements about the Supreme Court’s recent judgment on accessibility for persons with disabilities:
Which of the statements given above is/are correct? A) 1 and 2 |
Q. India is home to lakhs of persons with disabilities. What are the benefits available to them under the law? (2011)
Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only Ans: (d)
|
| Answer 5- A
Explanation · Statement 1 is correct: The Supreme Court ruled that the RPwD Rules of 2017 provide non-binding guidelines and not mandatory standards for accessibility. · Statement 2 is correct: The Court directed the Union government to frame mandatory rules for accessibility within three months and also emphasized imposing penalties for non-compliance. · Statement 3 is incorrect: The Court did not emphasize self-regulatory guidelines but instead ordered the government to create mandatory rules for accessibility. · Therefore, option A is the correct answer. |