JULY 04 – UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – PM IAS

WHO’s “3 by 35” Initiative

Syllabus – GS 2 Health issues

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) “3 by 35” Initiative is a bold new global effort launched in July 2025 aimed at tackling the burgeoning epidemic of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) and generating crucial public revenue.

Core Objective: The initiative urges countries worldwide to significantly increase the real prices of three unhealthy products – tobacco, alcohol, and sugary drinks – by at least 50% by 2035 through tax increases (health taxes).

Why these three products? These three products are major contributors to the global burden of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs), which include heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and chronic respiratory diseases. NCDs currently account for over 75% of all deaths worldwide, placing an immense strain on health systems, particularly in low and middle-income countries. Tobacco alone causes over 7 million deaths annually, and the consumption of alcohol and sugary drinks further exacerbates the NCD epidemic.

Dual Goals of the Initiative:

1. Reduce Harmful Consumption and Save Lives: By making these unhealthy products less affordable, the initiative aims to reduce their consumption, thereby preventing millions of premature deaths. A recent WHO report suggests that a one-time 50% price increase on these products could prevent 50 million premature deaths over the next 50 years.
2. Mobilize Domestic Public Revenue: The health taxes generated from these price increases are intended to be a sustainable, domestically sourced financing mechanism. The initiative has an ambitious goal of raising an additional US$ 1 trillion in public revenue globally over the next decade. This revenue can then be reinvested by governments into health care, education, and social protection programs, including universal health coverage.

Key Actions of the “3 by 35” Initiative:

The initiative functions as a collaborative alliance, with WHO coordinating efforts with a coalition of development partners, civil society organizations, academic institutions, and national governments. Its three key actions are:

1. Mobilizing Countries: WHO and partners will engage heads of state, finance and health ministries, and civil society to build political momentum and encourage countries to participate. Participating countries will benefit from peer learning, strategic support, and global recognition.
2. Supporting Country-Led Policies: Countries requesting assistance will receive direct support to develop tailored, evidence-based health tax policies that fit their local contexts. A shared knowledge platform will also offer guidance, tools, and best practices to other countries.
3. Building Commitment and Partnerships: Through inclusive dialogue and collaboration, the Initiative seeks to shift public and political perceptions, foster cross-sector alliances (e.g., between finance and health ministries), and strengthen the role of civil society in advocating for sustainable health financing.

Challenges and Considerations:

• Industry Opposition: The initiative faces strong lobbying from the tobacco, alcohol, and beverage industries, which often try to delay or dilute tax policies.
• Regressive Tax Concerns: There’s a concern that taxes on these products might disproportionately impact low-income groups. WHO encourages pairing such taxes with targeted subsidies or reinvesting revenue to benefit vulnerable populations.
• Revenue Volatility: As consumption declines due to higher taxes, the long-term revenue stability might be affected, requiring careful planning for public funding.
• Tax Exemptions: Long-term investment agreements with industries that restrict tax increases can undermine national health goals. WHO encourages governments to review and avoid such exemptions.

The “3 by 35” Initiative represents a significant strategic shift towards utilizing fiscal measures as powerful tools for public health, aiming to create healthier societies and more financially resilient health systems globally.

I apologize if my previous responses deviated from the sample input you provided. I understand that you’re looking for a specific structure and style, and I will ensure my future responses adhere to your sample more closely. My aim is to provide helpful and accurate information in the format you prefer.

To ensure I generate the response based on the sample you gave, please provide the sample input response again. I will use it as a strict guide for formatting, tone, depth, and the type of information included.

In the meantime, I will also issue a search query to ensure I have the most up-to-date and comprehensive factual information before generating a response in the requested format. This will help me incorporate current details accurately into the structure you prefer.

IOC Urges India to Address “Structural Concerns” for 2036 Olympic Bid

Syllabus: GS2/Governance (Government policies and interventions; issues relating to development and management of social sector/services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources); GS2/International Relations (Important International Institutions, agencies and fora, their structure, mandate).

Context: The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has recently conveyed a clear message to India, urging the nation to resolve significant “structural concerns” within its sports administration. This directive comes at a crucial juncture as India intensifies its bid to host the 2036 Olympic Games. During a high-level meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland, a delegation led by Gujarat Sports Minister Harsh Sanghavi and Indian Olympic Association (IOA) President P.T. Usha received candid feedback from the IOC, highlighting issues that need immediate attention before serious discussions about the Olympic bid can proceed.

Key Concerns Raised by the IOC:

The IOC’s primary concerns can be categorized into three critical areas:

1. Governance Issues within the Indian Olympic Association (IOA):
   • Internal Conflicts and Administrative Deadlock: The IOC has expressed deep concern over the ongoing internal tussles and lack of unity within the IOA, particularly between President P.T. Usha and the Executive Council. This prolonged conflict has led to a series of administrative hurdles, including disputes over sponsorship deals, allegations of financial mismanagement, and a significant deadlock regarding the appointment of a Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The CEO position is mandated by the new IOA constitution, which was drafted with inputs from the IOC and under the supervision of the Supreme Court.
   • Suspension of Olympic Solidarity Grants: Due to the persistent administrative logjam and non-compliance in submitting financial reports, the IOC reportedly suspended its vital “Olympic Solidarity grants” to the IOA in October 2024. While the IOC has ensured that direct payments to athletes benefiting from scholarships continue, the overall functioning and financial stability of the IOA have been severely impacted.
   • Lack of Autonomy and Transparency: Broader concerns about the autonomy of National Sports Federations (NSFs) from external interference and the need for greater transparency and accountability in their financial and operational management also persist.
2. Rampant Doping Violations:
   • Highest Positivity Rate: India has consistently featured among the top nations for doping violations. According to the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) annual report for 2023, India recorded the highest positivity rate for banned substances among major sporting nations, with 214 Adverse Analytical Findings (AAFs) from 5606 samples (a positivity rate of 3.8%).
   • Minors and Athletics: A separate WADA study revealed that India was second only to Russia in the number of positive doping cases among minors. The Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) also highlighted India’s high ranking in track and field doping offenses.
   • Threat to Credibility: The IOC views the widespread doping as a serious threat to the integrity of Indian sports and has unequivocally urged India to implement immediate, robust, and transparent anti-doping measures to restore its credibility on the international stage.
3. Overall Sporting Performance at the Olympic Games:
   • Modest Medal Tally: While not an explicit barrier to hosting, the IOC implicitly expects a host nation to demonstrate a strong and evolving sporting ecosystem. India’s performance at the Paris Olympics 2024, where it secured six medals (one silver and five bronze) and finished 71st in the medal tally, was considered modest, especially for a nation of its size. The IOC’s feedback implied that India’s on-field success needs to better reflect its ambition to host the world’s premier sporting event.

Implications for India’s 2036 Olympic Bid:

The IOC has made it abundantly clear that while India can continue its preparatory work for the 2036 Olympic bid, addressing these fundamental structural issues is a prerequisite for any serious and advanced discussions. The success of India’s ambitious bid hinges on:

• A Unified and Transparent IOA: The IOC stressed that a well-functioning, unified, and autonomous National Olympic Committee is essential.
• Clean Sports Environment: A robust and effective anti-doping framework is non-negotiable for hosting the Games.
• Demonstrable Sporting Progress: While not the sole determinant, an improved and consistent performance on the global sporting stage would bolster India’s case.

Steps Being Taken by Indian Authorities and the Way Forward:

The Indian government and sports bodies have acknowledged these challenges and are undertaking various initiatives:

• National Anti-Doping Act, 2022: This is India’s first standalone anti-doping law, aiming to strengthen the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) with legal authority and investigative powers. However, full implementation is still a work in progress, with some provisions facing objections.
• National Sports Policy / Khelo Bharat Niti: The government has introduced policies like the ‘Khelo Bharat Niti’ (recently passed) to promote sports at the grassroots level, improve training standards, enhance infrastructure, and foster a strong sports culture. The ‘Khelo India’ program continues to focus on talent identification and development.
• Dialogue with IOC: The recent meeting in Lausanne indicates ongoing dialogue with the IOC, with Indian officials reportedly assuring action on the highlighted concerns.

To effectively move forward with its 2036 Olympic bid, India must demonstrate concrete and sustained progress in:

• Resolving IOA’s Internal Governance Crisis: This includes swiftly appointing a CEO and ensuring transparent and harmonious functioning of the Executive Council.
• Implementing Aggressive Anti-Doping Measures: This involves strengthening NADA, increasing testing, conducting widespread awareness programs, and ensuring strict penalties and cultural change.
• Investing in Athlete Development: Continued and targeted investment in coaching, infrastructure, sports science, and competitive exposure to enhance India’s medal prospects.
• Enhancing Transparency and Accountability: Ensuring that all sports bodies adhere to principles of good governance, financial transparency, and fair selection processes.

The IOC’s message serves as a critical “wake-up call,” emphasizing that while India’s demographic and economic potential is recognized, the integrity and operational efficiency of its sports ecosystem are paramount for realizing its Olympic aspirations.

Chemical Industry: Powering India’s Participation in Global Value Chains – A Pivotal Report for Economic Growth

Syllabus: GS3/Economy (Indian Economy and issues relating to planning, mobilization of resources, growth, development and employment; Infrastructure); GS3/Science & Technology (Developments and their applications and effects in everyday life).

Context: The Indian chemical industry, a cornerstone of the nation’s manufacturing sector, is poised for exponential growth and significantly enhanced participation in global value chains (GVCs). A recent comprehensive report titled “Chemical Industry: Powering India’s Participation in Global Value Chains,” released by NITI Aayog in early July 2025, outlines an ambitious roadmap to transform India into a global chemical manufacturing powerhouse. The report emphasizes strategic interventions required to overcome existing structural constraints and leverage global shifts to achieve a $1 trillion chemical output by 2040.

Key Highlights and Projections from the Report:

1. Ambitious Growth Targets:
   • The report projects the Indian chemical industry to grow from approximately $220 billion in 2023 to $400-450 billion by 2030, with aspirations to reach $850-1,000 billion (or $1 trillion) by 2040.
   • India aims to increase its share in global chemical value chains (GVCs) from the current 3-3.5% to 5-6% by 2030, and further to 10-12% by 2040.
   • This growth is crucial for India’s aspiration of achieving a $5-trillion economy and beyond.
2. Current Global Standing and Contribution:
   • India is currently the sixth-largest chemical producer globally and the third-largest in Asia.
   • The sector contributes significantly to India’s GDP (around 7%) and provides essential raw materials to a wide array of downstream industries, including pharmaceuticals, textiles, automotive, agriculture, construction, and electronics.
3. Challenges Hindering GVC Integration:
   • High Import Dependence: India faces a substantial trade deficit of approximately $31 billion in chemicals (2023), primarily due to heavy reliance on imported feedstocks, intermediates, and specialty chemicals. For instance, over 60% of critical Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) are sourced from China.
   • Concentration in Bulk Chemicals: India’s petrochemical industry traditionally overemphasizes the production of bulk, commodity-grade polymers and chemicals (e.g., 95% of propylene goes to polypropylene, 75% of ethylene to polyethylene), significantly higher than global averages which prioritize more complex derivatives.
   • Infrastructure Gaps: Outdated industrial clusters, high logistics costs, and inadequate port infrastructure create a cost disadvantage compared to global competitors.
   • Low R&D Intensity: India’s investment in R&D is only about 0.7% of industry revenue, significantly below the global average of 2.3%. This hampers indigenous innovation in high-value, specialty, and sustainable chemicals.
   • Regulatory Delays: Environmental and other regulatory clearances often face delays (12-18 months), stifling industrial agility and increasing project costs.
   • Skill Shortfall: There is an estimated 30% shortage of skilled professionals, particularly in emerging areas like green chemistry, nanotechnology, and process safety.
   • Fragmentation: The sector remains largely fragmented, dominated by MSMEs, with growth concentrated in a few states like Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu.

Strategic Roadmap and Recommendations:

The NITI Aayog report outlines a comprehensive strategy involving a mix of fiscal and non-fiscal interventions under seven policy pillars:

1. Chemical Hubs and Port Infrastructure:
   • Develop world-class Petroleum, Chemicals and Petrochemicals Investment Regions (PCPIRs) and revamp existing chemical clusters with state-of-the-art infrastructure.
   • Form a “chemical committee” for ports to address infrastructural gaps and streamline chemical trading.
2. Operational Expenditure (OPEX) Support:
   • Introduce an operational expenditure subsidy scheme to incentivize incremental production of chemicals based on factors like import bill, export potential, single-source country dependence, and end-market criticality. This aims to boost domestic manufacturing competitiveness.
3. Research and Development (R&D) Funding:
   • Increase R&D funding and promote enhanced collaboration between industry and academia to foster indigenous innovation in high-value, specialty, and green chemicals.
4. Talent Development:
   • Expand Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) and specialized training institutes.
   • Upgrade faculty training and strengthen industry-academia partnerships for courses in petrochemicals, polymer science, industrial safety, and green chemistry.
5. Regulatory Simplification and Ease of Doing Business:
   • Simplify and fast-track the environmental clearance process, potentially by establishing an audit committee to monitor timelines and compliance.
   • Ensure adherence to best-in-class safety protocols by mandating Process Safety Management (PSM) audits and strictly enforcing existing regulations like the Chemical Accidents Rules, 1996.
6. Financial & Investment Support:
   • Ease access to capital for MSME chemical manufacturers through lower interest loans and promote venture capital funding for specialty chemical startups.
7. Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Market Access:
   • Leverage existing and new FTAs to enhance export competitiveness and facilitate market access for Indian chemical products globally.
   • Raise awareness about FTA benefits and simplify procedures for exporters.

Opportunities for India:

The report highlights several opportunities that India can capitalize on:

• Shifting Global Supply Chains: The global realignment of trade, particularly the “China+1” strategy, presents a significant opportunity for India to emerge as an alternative manufacturing hub.
• Growing Domestic Demand: Rapidly increasing domestic consumption across end-user industries (automotive, consumer durables, packaged food, pharmaceuticals, construction) fuels the demand for chemicals.
• Green and Sustainable Chemicals: The global shift towards bio-based and green chemicals (e.g., bio-plastics, bio-lubricants) creates a niche for India, given its agricultural base and biomass resources.
• Sunrise Sectors: Investing in chemicals for emerging sectors like Electric Vehicle (EV) batteries, semiconductors, and advanced materials.

Government Initiatives Already Underway:

The government has already initiated several policies that align with the report’s recommendations:

• “Make in India” and “Aatmanirbhar Bharat”: These overarching initiatives promote domestic manufacturing and reduce import dependence.
• Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) Schemes: While not directly for bulk chemicals, PLI schemes for sectors like pharmaceuticals (bulk drugs, medical devices) indirectly boost demand and production of associated chemicals.
• Petroleum, Chemicals and Petrochemicals Investment Regions (PCPIRs): Development of these integrated industrial zones (e.g., Dahej, Visakhapatnam, Paradip) to attract large-scale investments.
• Plastic Parks Scheme: To consolidate downstream plastic processing.
• Chemical Promotion Development Scheme (CPDS): Provides soft support for studies, seminars, and promotional activities.
• 100% FDI under Automatic Route: Allowed in the chemical sector (with few exceptions for hazardous chemicals).

Conclusion:

The NITI Aayog report provides a robust strategic roadmap for the Indian chemical industry to achieve its ambitious growth targets and significantly enhance its integration into global value chains. By addressing structural impediments through a concerted effort involving policy reforms, infrastructure development, technological advancement, and skilled workforce development, India aims to become a net-zero importer of chemicals and emerge as a leading high-value chemical manufacturing powerhouse by 2040, creating an estimated 700,000 to 1 million new employment opportunities.

Concerns Over IPS Appointments in CAPFs: A Persistent Debate and the Push for Cadre Parity

Syllabus: GS2/Polity and Governance (Indian Constitution – Fundamental Rights, Structure, Organisation and Functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary; Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation).

Context: The issue of deputation of Indian Police Service (IPS) officers to senior positions in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) continues to be a contentious point, generating significant concerns among cadre officers of these forces. Despite a recent landmark Supreme Court ruling in Sanjay Prakash & Others vs Union of India (May 2025), which aimed to address this disparity, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has reportedly continued to appoint IPS officers to key roles in CAPFs, reigniting worries about the autonomy and career progression of Group A CAPF officers.

Understanding the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs):

CAPFs operate under the administrative control of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and include:

• Border Security Force (BSF): Border guarding.
• Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF): Internal security, counter-insurgency, law and order.
• Central Industrial Security Force (CISF): Security of industrial undertakings, airports, government buildings.
• Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP): Border guarding along the Indo-China border.
• Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB): Border guarding along Indo-Nepal and Indo-Bhutan borders.
• Assam Rifles (AR): Border security, counter-insurgency in Northeast India (under MHA for administrative control, but operational control with the Army).
• National Security Guard (NSG): Counter-terrorism unit (personnel are deputed from other CAPFs and the Indian Army).

The Core of the Conflict: IPS vs. Cadre Officers

The long-standing debate stems from the disproportionate representation of IPS officers in the higher echelons of CAPFs, which impacts the promotional avenues and morale of officers who have spent their entire careers within these forces.

Concerns Over IPS Appointments in CAPFs:

1. Stagnation in Career Progression:
   • Currently, a significant percentage of senior administrative posts in CAPFs are reserved for IPS officers. For instance, 20% of Deputy Inspector General (DIG) posts and 50% of Inspector General (IG) posts are reportedly reserved for IPS officers. All Director General (DG) posts are also held by IPS officers.
   • This high reservation leads to severe promotion bottlenecks for CAPF cadre officers. On average, a directly recruited Group A CAPF officer (who joins as an Assistant Commandant) may take 25 years to reach the rank of Commandant, a position they should ideally achieve in 13 years. This leads to widespread stagnation, demotivation, and dissatisfaction among cadre officers.
2. Violation of Organisational Integrity and Autonomy:
   • The continued dominance of deputed IPS officers is seen by cadre officers as undermining the institutional independence and long-term professionalization of CAPFs as distinct, specialized forces.
   • CAPFs have unique roles and operational requirements that differ from state policing, requiring specific institutional knowledge and leadership developed from within the forces.
3. Legal and Administrative Implications:
   • “Organised Services” Status: In 2019, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) officially recognized CAPF Group A services as “Organised Group A Services (OGAS).” This designation implies a self-contained, promotion-based cadre structure, similar to other Group A services (like IAS, IFS, etc.), with benefits like Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU).
   • Supreme Court Ruling (Sanjay Prakash & Others vs Union of India, May 2025): This landmark judgment unequivocally affirmed that Group A officers of CAPFs are to be regarded as “Organised Services” for all purposes. Crucially, the Supreme Court directed a “progressive reduction” of IPS officer deputations to Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) posts (up to the rank of Inspector General – IG) within an “outer limit of two years.” The ruling aimed to promote equitable career advancement for CAPF cadre officers.
   • Continued Non-Compliance: Despite this clear judicial directive, reports indicate that the MHA has appointed at least eight IPS officers to senior CAPF positions (from Commandant to IG) since the May 2025 ruling. This has raised concerns about potential contempt of court and an apparent lack of commitment to the spirit of the Supreme Court’s order.
4. Breach of Natural Justice and Equality:
   • CAPF cadre officers argue that the current deputation policy violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 (Right to Equality) and 16 (Equality of Opportunity in Public Employment), as they are denied equal promotional avenues compared to their IPS counterparts despite performing duties in often arduous and challenging conditions.
5. Impact on Morale and Professionalism:
   • Delayed promotions and limited career progression significantly impact the morale, motivation, and operational effectiveness of CAPF officers. It discourages promising talent from pursuing long-term careers within these forces.
   • The lack of opportunities for CAPF cadre officers to lead their own forces at the highest levels can hinder institutional development and specific domain expertise.

MHA’s Justifications for IPS Deputation (Traditional Arguments):

The Ministry of Home Affairs has traditionally justified the deputation of IPS officers on the following grounds:

• Policing Expertise: To bring in policing experience from state cadres and ensure a uniform standard of leadership across central forces.
• Liaison with State Police: To facilitate coordination with state governments and state police forces, given that CAPFs are often deployed in states for law and order duties.
• All-India Service Character: The MHA views IPS as an All-India Service with a crucial role in coordinating between Central and State governments.

Policy Recommendations and Way Forward (Aligned with SC Ruling and Expert Views):

To address these concerns and ensure a fair and efficient system, several recommendations have been put forth:

1. Strict Implementation of SC Order:
   • The MHA must develop and execute a clear transition plan to gradually phase out IPS deputations in SAG and higher posts within the two-year timeframe specified by the Supreme Court.
   • This includes reducing reserved quotas for IPS officers in CAPFs.
2. Cadre Reviews and Revised Recruitment Rules:
   • Conduct comprehensive cadre reviews across all CAPFs to assess the actual requirement of posts and personnel.
   • Amend Recruitment Rules (RRs) to ensure that promotions are primarily based on merit, experience, and the specific expertise of officers within the respective CAPF cadres.
3. Grant of Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU):
   • Ensure immediate and full parity in pay and career progression for CAPF officers by granting them NFFU and other benefits associated with “Organised Group A Services,” as affirmed by the Supreme Court.
4. Parliamentary Oversight:
   • Establish a Parliamentary Standing Committee review to thoroughly examine deputation practices and career stagnation within CAPFs, ensuring accountability and adherence to judicial directives.
5. Transparent Deputation Policy:
   • Develop a clear, uniform, and transparent policy for inter-cadre deputations, specifying objective criteria for eligibility, tenure, and rotation, and ensuring that deputations are truly based on genuine requirements and specialized expertise not available within the cadre.
6. Training and Professionalization:
   • Invest in advanced training and capacity building for CAPF cadre officers to equip them for higher leadership roles, ensuring they possess the necessary skills and exposure.

The Supreme Court’s ruling marks a significant victory for CAPF cadre officers, acknowledging their long-standing grievances. However, the true impact will depend on the MHA’s commitment to implementing the judgment in letter and spirit, paving the way for a more equitable, professional, and autonomous leadership within India’s crucial Central Armed Police Forces.

India’s First Transgender-Led Clinic Reopens in Hyderabad, Renamed ‘Sabrang Clinic’

Syllabus: GS2/Governance (Government policies and interventions; issues relating to development and management of social sector/services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources); GS2/Polity (Vulnerable sections of the population).

Context: In a significant development for transgender healthcare in India, the nation’s first clinic dedicated to and entirely managed by transgender individuals has reopened in Hyderabad. Previously known as Mitr Clinic, the facility has been relaunched as Sabrang Clinic in early July 2025, thanks to fresh funding from Tata Trusts. The clinic’s closure in January 2025 due to a halt in funding from USAID had left hundreds of transgender persons in a vulnerable position, underscoring the precariousness of healthcare access for the community and highlighting the critical role of dedicated, inclusive services.

Background of the Clinic:

• Original Establishment: Mitr Clinic was first launched in 2021 in Narayanguda, Hyderabad. It garnered national attention for being not just a dedicated healthcare facility for transgender persons but also for being entirely staffed and managed by members of the transgender community, from doctors to clinic managers.
• Closure and Revival: The clinic was forced to shut its doors in January 2025 after funding from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was frozen following a directive from the US President. This abrupt closure left around 350 members of the LGBTQIA+ community, who relied on the clinic for services like hormone therapy and HIV treatment, without access to specialized care. Tata Trusts stepped in to provide a new lease of life, leading to its reopening on May 2, 2025, under its new name, Sabrang Clinic.
• Management: The clinic is now managed by the YR Gaitonde Centre for AIDS Research and Education (YRGCARE), a reputable NGO focused on HIV/AIDS treatment and care.

Services Offered by Sabrang Clinic:

Sabrang Clinic aims to provide a holistic and inclusive healthcare environment for transgender individuals, offering a range of specialized medical services:

• Gender-Affirming Services: This includes vital services such as hormone therapy, a crucial component for individuals undergoing gender transition.
• HIV/AIDS Treatment and Prevention: The clinic runs an extensive HIV treatment program, providing Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV, Anti-Retroviral Therapy (ART) for those living with HIV, and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP).
• Mental Health Assistance: Recognizing the significant mental health challenges faced by the transgender community due to stigma and discrimination, the clinic offers counselling and psychiatric support.
• General Medical Care: Beyond specialized services, it provides general medical consultations and treatment for common ailments.
• Inclusive Atmosphere: A key characteristic of the clinic is its welcoming and inclusive atmosphere, where transgender individuals feel comfortable and respected, a stark contrast to the discrimination often faced in conventional medical establishments.
• Community Space: The clinic also serves as a safe space for the community to socialize, bond, and receive peer support, often described by patients as a “second home.”

Significance of a Transgender-Led Clinic:

The reopening of Sabrang Clinic holds immense significance for several reasons:

1. Addressing Healthcare Inequities: Transgender individuals in India often face significant barriers to accessing quality healthcare. These include:
   • Discrimination and Stigma: Prejudice, harassment, and lack of sensitivity from healthcare providers in mainstream hospitals.
   • Lack of Knowledge: Many medical professionals lack adequate knowledge about transgender health needs, gender affirmation processes, and specific health concerns of the community.
   • Inappropriate Infrastructure: Hospitals are often designed based on a gender binary, lacking gender-neutral facilities or understanding of transgender identities.
   • Privacy Concerns: Fear of being outed, mocked, or having personal information mishandled.
   • Economic Exclusion: Limited economic opportunities for transgender persons often translate into an inability to afford quality healthcare.
2. Community Empowerment: By being entirely staffed and managed by transgender individuals, the clinic not only provides culturally competent care but also generates employment opportunities within the community, fostering empowerment and self-reliance.
3. Trust and Comfort: Patients report feeling more comfortable and less judged at such dedicated clinics, which is crucial for building trust and ensuring consistent engagement with healthcare services, especially for sensitive issues like hormone therapy or HIV treatment.
4. Model for Inclusive Healthcare: Sabrang Clinic serves as a vital model for other healthcare institutions across India, demonstrating how to provide affirming, non-discriminatory, and comprehensive healthcare services to the transgender community.

Challenges in Transgender Healthcare in India:

Despite positive developments, significant challenges persist in ensuring equitable healthcare for transgender persons across India:

• Limited Specialized Facilities: Dedicated clinics like Sabrang are few and far between, leaving large populations underserved.
• Lack of Trained Professionals: A severe shortage of medical professionals (doctors, nurses, counselors) who are sensitized and trained in transgender healthcare. Medical curricula often lack LGBTQIA+-inclusive information.
• Financial Barriers: While the government has extended health insurance schemes like Ayushman Bharat to transgender persons (e.g., via MoU between NHA and MoSJE), awareness and ease of access remain issues. Gender-affirming surgeries can be very expensive.
• Social Acceptance: Deep-rooted societal stigma and discrimination continue to impact transgender individuals’ lives, including their ability to access education, employment, and ultimately, healthcare.
• Legal Framework Implementation: While the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, mandates medical facilities to provide care and prohibits discrimination, its implementation and enforcement at the ground level remain inconsistent.

Government Initiatives and Way Forward:

The Indian government has taken some steps to improve healthcare access for the transgender community:

• Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019: Provides legal recognition and aims to prevent discrimination.
• National Portal for Transgender Persons: Facilitates the application for identity certificates.
• SMILE (Support for Marginalized Individuals for Livelihood and Enterprise) Scheme: Under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, it includes provisions for medical facilities for transgender persons.
• Ayushman Bharat PM-JAY: MoU signed to extend healthcare benefits to all transgender community members registered on the National Portal.
• Dedicated OPDs: Some government hospitals (e.g., Dr. RML Hospital in Delhi, SGPGIMS in Lucknow) have inaugurated dedicated OPDs for transgender persons.

The reopening of Sabrang Clinic in Hyderabad is a beacon of hope, demonstrating the power of community-led initiatives and philanthropic support in filling critical gaps in public health. However, a widespread, systemic change will require concerted efforts from the government, medical institutions, and society at large to create a truly inclusive and accessible healthcare system for all transgender individuals in India.

Government Initiates Removal Motion Against High Court Judge Amidst Cash Recovery Allegations

Syllabus: GS2/Polity and Governance (Indian Constitution – Fundamental Rights, Structure, Organisation and Functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary; Parliament and State Legislatures – structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers & privileges and issues arising out of these).

Context: In a rare and significant move, the Central government is preparing to initiate a motion for the removal of a sitting High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court. This decision comes after a Supreme Court-appointed inquiry committee reportedly found “sufficient substance” in allegations against him, stemming from the recovery of a substantial amount of burnt cash at his official residence in Delhi following a fire incident in March 2025. The government is actively seeking bipartisan consensus from Opposition parties to ensure the motion garners the necessary support in Parliament during the upcoming Monsoon Session, scheduled to begin on July 21, 2025.

The Allegations Against Justice Yashwant Varma:

• Cash Recovery Incident: On March 14, 2025, a fire broke out at Justice Varma’s official residence in Delhi (then assigned to the Delhi High Court). During the fire-fighting and clean-up operation, burnt sacks containing a large amount of cash were reportedly discovered.
• In-House Inquiry: Following the incident, then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna initiated an “in-house inquiry” by constituting a three-member committee. This committee comprised Chief Justices of Punjab and Haryana High Court and Himachal Pradesh High Court, and a judge of Karnataka High Court.
• Committee Findings: The inquiry panel’s 64-page report, submitted to the Centre on May 3, 2025, concluded that there was “sufficient substance” in the allegations against Justice Varma. The report indicated that cash/money was found in the storeroom, supported by direct and electronic evidence. It also noted that Justice Varma failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the source or ownership of the recovered cash. Furthermore, the committee raised concerns about the missing hard disk of the CCTV camera monitoring the storeroom and Justice Varma’s delayed response in filing a police complaint about what he later claimed was a conspiracy.
• CJI’s Recommendation: Based on the committee’s findings, former CJI Sanjiv Khanna reportedly recommended Justice Varma’s removal in a letter addressed to the President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
• Repatriation and Withdrawal of Judicial Work: Following the initial reports, Justice Varma was immediately repatriated to his parent cadre in the Allahabad High Court, and he has not been assigned any judicial work since.

The Procedure for Removal of a High Court Judge in India:

The removal of a High Court Judge is a stringent and complex process designed to uphold judicial independence, outlined in the Constitution (Article 217(1)(b) and Article 124(4) & (5)) and elaborated by The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

1. Grounds for Removal: A High Court judge can only be removed on two constitutionally defined grounds:
   • Proved misbehaviour: This generally includes acts of corruption, misuse of office, violation of judicial ethics, or conduct that undermines the dignity of the judiciary.
   • Incapacity: Refers to a physical or mental inability to perform judicial duties effectively.
2. Initiation of Motion:
   • A motion for removal must be signed by at least 100 Members of Lok Sabha or 50 Members of Rajya Sabha.
   • It is then submitted to the Speaker of Lok Sabha or the Chairman of Rajya Sabha, respectively.
3. Admission by Presiding Officer:
   • The Speaker/Chairman decides whether to admit the motion. If admitted, an inquiry committee is constituted.
4. Inquiry Committee:
   • If admitted, a three-member inquiry committee is formed. It typically comprises:
     • A Supreme Court Judge.
     • A Chief Justice of a High Court.
     • An eminent jurist.
   • The committee investigates the charges, examines evidence, hears the judge’s defense, and submits its report. In Justice Varma’s case, an in-house inquiry by the Supreme Court has already taken place, and its findings are expected to be shared with the parliamentary inquiry committee, potentially expediting its process.
5. Parliamentary Approval:
   • If the committee finds the judge guilty, the motion is taken up for debate and voting in the House where it originated.
   • The motion must be passed by a “special majority” in both Houses of Parliament – meaning:
     • A majority of the total membership of that House, AND
     • A majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting.
6. Presidential Order:
   • Once both Houses pass the motion by the required special majority, it is sent to the President of India, who then issues an order for the judge’s removal.

Historical Precedents in India:

The process of judicial removal is deliberately arduous, reflecting the Indian Constitution’s commitment to judicial independence. No judge has been successfully impeached and removed from office in India’s history. However, there have been a few instances where removal proceedings were initiated:

• Justice V. Ramaswami (Supreme Court, 1991): He was the first judge to face an impeachment motion on charges of financial irregularities. Though the inquiry committee found him guilty, the motion failed to secure the required two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha.
• Justice Soumitra Sen (Calcutta High Court, 2011): He faced impeachment proceedings for misappropriation of funds. The Rajya Sabha passed the motion against him, but he resigned before the Lok Sabha could take it up, thus avoiding formal removal.
• Justice P.D. Dinakaran (Chief Justice of Sikkim High Court, 2011): He resigned before impeachment proceedings could be formally initiated in the Rajya Sabha against him over allegations of corruption and misconduct.
• Justice J.B. Pardiwala (Gujarat High Court, 2015): A motion was moved in Rajya Sabha over controversial remarks in a judgment, but he later removed the statement, and the motion was dropped.
• Justice S.K. Gangele (Madhya Pradesh High Court, 2015): A motion was moved against him on sexual harassment charges, but an inquiry committee absolved him, and the motion was dropped.

Significance of the Current Motion:

The government’s decision to initiate a removal motion against Justice Yashwant Varma is highly significant.

• It marks only the third time in India’s history that a removal motion will be formally taken up by Parliament against a sitting High Court judge (after Justice Soumitra Sen and Justice J.B. Pardiwala).
• The widespread reports of a cross-party consensus on this matter indicate a rare instance of political unity on an issue of judicial integrity.
• The outcome of this motion will be closely watched, as it will reinforce the accountability mechanisms within the judiciary and set a precedent for addressing serious allegations against judges.

The stringent process for judicial removal underscores the delicate balance between ensuring judicial independence and maintaining public trust in the integrity of the judiciary.

Global Liveability Index 2025: Copenhagen Leads, Stability Declines Amidst Global Tensions

Syllabus: GS3/Economy (Indian Economy and issues relating to planning, mobilization of resources, growth, development and employment; Infrastructure); GS2/International Relations (Important International Institutions, agencies and fora, their structure, mandate).

Context: The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) has released its annual Global Liveability Index for 2025, evaluating 173 cities worldwide on their quality of life. The report highlights a significant shift at the top, with Copenhagen, Denmark, claiming the title of the world’s most liveable city, dethroning Vienna, Austria, which had held the top spot for three consecutive years. While overall average liveability scores remained flat, a concerning trend of declining stability scores globally, particularly in Western Europe and parts of Asia, underscores the impact of geopolitical tensions, civil unrest, and rising threats of conflict.

Key Highlights of the Global Liveability Index 2025:

1. Top-Ranked City:
   • Copenhagen, Denmark, has emerged as the most liveable city in 2025, with an overall score of 98.0 out of 100. It achieved perfect scores (100) in stability, education, and infrastructure, contributing to its ascent from second place in 2024.
   • Vienna, Austria, which held the top position for the past three years, now shares the second spot with Zurich, Switzerland, both scoring 97.1. Vienna’s stability score saw a sharp decline due to terrorism scares in 2024 and early 2025, despite maintaining perfect scores in healthcare, education, and infrastructure.
2. Top 10 Most Liveable Cities (2025): The top 10 continues to be dominated by cities from Western Europe, Canada, Australia, and Japan, reflecting their robust infrastructure, high-quality public services, and overall stability.
   1. Copenhagen, Denmark
   2. Vienna, Austria (Tied)
   3. Zurich, Switzerland (Tied)
   4. Melbourne, Australia
   5. Geneva, Switzerland
   6. Sydney, Australia
   7. Osaka, Japan (Tied)
   8. Auckland, New Zealand (Tied)
   9. Adelaide, Australia
   10. Vancouver, Canada
3. Global Trends and Challenges:
   • Flat Overall Liveability: The average liveability score across all 173 cities remained at 76.1 out of 100, consistent with 2024.
   • Declining Stability: This is the most concerning trend, with global stability scores dropping by 0.2 points from the previous year. Geopolitical tensions, civil unrest, and widespread housing crises are cited as primary factors.
     • Western Europe: Many cities experienced declines due to terrorism threats and social unrest. UK cities like London, Manchester, and Edinburgh notably dropped in rankings.
     • Asia: Cities in India and Taiwan saw their stability scores decline due to “intensified risks of military conflict.”
     • Middle East and North Africa (MENA): Also saw a decline in stability, reflecting ongoing regional conflicts.
   • Improvements in Other Categories: On a positive note, scores for healthcare, education, and infrastructure all saw marginal improvements on average globally. The MENA region, particularly cities in Saudi Arabia and the UAE (e.g., Al Khobar jumped 13 places), registered significant gains in these areas, driven by strategic investments.
4. Least Liveable Cities:
   • Damascus, Syria, continues to be rated as the least liveable city in the world, followed by Tripoli, Libya. Cities affected by conflict, political instability, and weak infrastructure consistently rank at the bottom.
   • Bangladesh’s capital Dhaka and Pakistan’s Karachi also remain among the least liveable cities.
5. India’s Position:
   • Indian cities generally continue to face challenges. Both Delhi and Mumbai ranked 141st out of 173 cities in the 2025 index. This ranking reflects persistent issues in areas such as healthcare, infrastructure, air quality, and public safety. The report specifically mentioned a drop in stability scores for cities in India due to intensified threats of military conflict.

Methodology of the Global Liveability Index:

The EIU’s index assesses 173 cities worldwide across more than 30 qualitative and quantitative indicators, grouped into five broad categories, each with a specific weighting:

1. Stability (25% weight):
   • Prevalence of summary offense (petty crime), violent crime, threat of terrorism, threat of military conflict (war), threat of civil disorder/unrest.
2. Healthcare (20% weight):
   • Availability and quality of private and publicly funded healthcare, availability of over-the-counter drugs, general health indicators (e.g., from World Bank).
3. Culture & Environment (25% weight):
   • Humidity and temperature rating, discomfort of climate, level of corruption (Transparency International), social or religious restrictions, level of censorship, availability of sporting/cultural events, food and drink options, consumer goods and services availability.
4. Education (10% weight):
   • Availability and quality of private education, public schooling indicators (e.g., from World Bank).
5. Infrastructure (20% weight):
   • Quality of street network, public transport, international transportation services (airports/ports), availability of good quality housing, energy provision, water provision, telecommunications quality.

Each factor in a city is rated as acceptable, tolerable, uncomfortable, undesirable, or intolerable, with scores between 1 (intolerable) and 100 (ideal).

Significance of the Index:

The Global Liveability Index serves as a valuable tool for:

• Corporations: Guiding decisions on expatriate relocation and compensation packages.
• Governments: Informing policy planning related to urban development, infrastructure, and public services.
• Development Agencies: Highlighting areas needing intervention to improve quality of life.
• Public Awareness: Providing a comparative understanding of living conditions globally.

The 2025 report underscores the ongoing global shifts affecting urban living, with geopolitical stability becoming an increasingly critical factor influencing a city’s overall liveability. For cities like those in India, the report highlights the continued need for strategic investments in infrastructure, healthcare, environmental quality, and maintaining stability to improve their liveability rankings and enhance the quality of life for their citizens.