PM IAS MARCH 18 CURRENT EVENTS

Sealed cover jurisprudence

Context:

While hearing a criminal appeal against the Bihar Government, Chief Justice of India (CJI) admonished a counsel for submitting a ‘sealed cover report’ to the court.

Relevance:

GS II- Executive & Judiciary

Dimensions of the article::

1. What is sealed cover jurisprudence? 
2. When has it been done in the past? 
3. Criticism

What is sealed cover jurisprudence? 

• It is a practice used by the Supreme Court and sometimes lower courts, of asking for or accepting information from government agencies in sealed envelopes that can only be accessed by judges.
• While a specific law does not define the doctrine of sealed cover, the Supreme Court derives its power to use it from Rule 7 of order XIII of the Supreme Court Rules and Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.
• It is stated under the said rule that if the Chief Justice or court directs certain information to be kept under sealed cover or considers it of confidential nature, no party would be allowed access to the contents of such information, except if the Chief Justice himself orders that the opposite party be allowed to access it.

It also mentions that information can be kept confidential if its

• publication is not considered to be in the interest of the public.
• As for the Evidence Act, official unpublished documents relating to state affairs are protected and a public officer cannot be compelled to disclose such documents.
• Other instances where information may be sought in secrecy or confidence is when its publication impedes an ongoing investigation, such as details which are part of the police’s case diary; or breaches the privacy of an individual.

When has it been done in the past? 

 Rafale fighter jet deal,

• A Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi in 2018, had asked the Centre to submit details related to deal’s decision making and pricing in a sealed cover. T
• his was done as the Centre had contended that such details were subject to the Official Secrets Act and Secrecy clauses in the deal.

National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam,

• The supreme court mandated coordinator of the NRC, Prateek Hajela, was asked by the apex court to submit period reports in sealed cover, which could neither be accessed by the government nor the petitioners.

In the 2014 BCCI reforms case

• The probe committee of the cricket body had submitted its report to the Supreme Court in a sealed envelope, asking it not to make public the names of nine cricketers who were suspected of a match and spot fixing scam.

Bhima Koregaon case,

• Activists were arrested under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, the Supreme Court had relied on information submitted by the Maharashtra police in a sealed cover.

Criticism:

• Critics of this practice contend that it is not favorable to the principles of transparency and accountability of the Indian justice system.
• It stands in contrast to the idea of an open court, where decisions can be subjected to public scrutiny.
• It is also said to enlarge the scope for arbitrariness in court decisions, as judges are supposed to lay down reasoning for their decisions.
• Besides, it is argued that not providing access to such documents to the accused parties obstructs their passage to a fair trial and adjudication.

---

One rank, One pension

Context:

The Supreme Court  ruled there was “no constitutional infirmity” in the way the government had introduced ‘one rank, one pension’ (OROP) among ex-service personnel.

• The scheme, notified by the Defence Ministry on November 7, 2015, was challenged by Indian Ex-Service Movement, an association of retired defence personnel.

Relevance:

GS II- Government policies and Interventions

Dimensions of the Article:

1. About One rank, one pension
2. Issues with OROP
3. What has the SC ruled now?
4. Challenge to OROP

About One rank, one pension

• OROP means that any two military personnel retiring at the same rank, with the same years of service, must get an equal pension.
• While this might appear almost obvious, there are several reasons why two military personnel who may have retired at the same rank with the same years of service, may get different pensions.
• Military personnel across the three services fall under two categories,
  • the officers
  • the other ranks
• The other ranks, which are soldiers, usually retire at age 35.
• Unlike government employees who retire close to 60, soldiers can thus miss out on the benefits from subsequent pay commissions.
• And since pensions are based on the last drawn salary, pensions too are impacted adversely.
• Similarly, the age when officers in the military retire depends upon their ranks.
• Uttar Pradesh and Punjab have the highest number of OROP beneficiaries.
• Armed Forces Personnel who had retired till 30th june 2014 are covered under it.
• The implementation of the scheme was based on recommendation of the Koshiyari committee.

Earlier Pension Mechanism:

• From 1950 to 1973, there was a concept known as the Standard Rate of Pension, which was similar to OROP.
• In 1974, when the 3rd Pay Commission came into force, certain changes were effected in terms of weightage, additional years of notion service, etc., with regard to pensions.
• In 1986, the 4th Pay Commission’s report brought further changes.
• What ultimately happened was that the benefits of the successive pay commissions were not passed to servicemen who had retired earlier.
• Pensions differed for those who had retired at the same rank, with the same years of service, but years apart.

Issues with OROP

• It was constantly asserted during the OROP protests of 2013-15 that meeting the demand would be financially unsustainable.
• The Defence Ministry’s pension budget is quite big, affecting capital expenditure, because soldiers retire early and are entitled for pension for much longer than other employees.
• The total number of defence pensioners is 32.9 lakh, however that number includes 6.14 lakh civilian defence pensioners.
• In the fiscal year 2019-2020, the Defence Ministry spent Rs 1.18 lakh crore on pensions.
• The Defence Ministry has the largest pension-to-budget ratio of any ministry, with pensions accounting for more than one-fifth of the total defence budget.
• When Manohar Parrikar was the Defence Minister, it was projected that a one-time payment of Rs 83,000 crore would be required to resolve all outstanding concerns.

Challenge to OROP

• The petitioners contended that the principle of OROP had been replaced by ‘one rank multiple pensions’ for persons with the same length of service.
• They submitted that the government had altered the initial definition of OROP and, instead of an automatic revision of the rates of pension.
• Under this, any future raising of pension rates would be passed on to past pensioners — the revision would now take place at periodic intervals.
• According to the petitioners, this was arbitrary and unconstitutional under Articles 14 and 21.

What has the SC ruled now?

• The court did not agree with the argument that the government’s 2015 policy communication contradicted the original decision to implement OROP.
• It said that “while a decision to implement OROP was taken in principle, the modalities for implementation were yet to be chalked out.
• The court also said that while the Koshyari Committee report furnishes the historical background of the demand, and its own view on it, it cannot be construed as embodying a statement of governmental policy.
• It held that the OROP policy “may only be challenged on the ground that it is manifestly arbitrary or capricious”.

---

Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana Scheme

Context:

Maharashtra is the latest state to threaten to withdraw from the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bhima Yogna (PMFBY) if changes to it are not carried out.

• Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Telangana, Bihar, Gujarat, Punjab and West Bengal – all predominantly agriculture states – have already opted out of the scheme.

Relevance:

GS II- Welfare Schemes

Dimensions of the Article:

1. What changes has the Maharashtra government proposed?
2. About Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)
3. Risks covered under the scheme

What changes has the Maharashtra government proposed?

• One of the major changes the state government has proposed, is a share in premium collected from insurance companies during a non-payout or normal year.
• The state has also sought more accountability from insurance companies.
• Farm leaders have asked for necessary infrastructure to be set up while implementing the scheme, and the usage of technology to help eradicate human interference.

Beed model

• It was first experimented during kharif 2020
• Insurance companies provide cover to an extent of 110 per cent of the premium collected.
• In case the compensation amount exceeds this, the state government will bridge the amount.
• In case the compensation amount is less than the premium collected, the company will refund 80 per cent of the funds to the state government and keep 20 per cent for its administrative expenses.
• The model was implemented by the government-run Agricultural Insurance Company.
• However, the Centre has not given its nod for the same till date.

About Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)

• The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) launched on 2016 by Prime Minister Narendra Modi is an insurance service for farmers for their yields.
• PMFBY is in line with One Nation – One Scheme theme.
• The PMFBY will replace the existing two schemes National Agricultural Insurance Scheme as well as the Modified NAIS.
• The Scheme shall be implemented through a multi-agency framework by selected insurance companies under the overall guidance & control of the Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare (DAC&FW), Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare (MoA&FW), Government of India (GOI) and the concerned State in co-ordination with various other agencies.
• Premium cost over and above the farmer share is equally subsidized by States and the Central Government of India. However, the Central Government shares 90% of the premium subsidy for North Eastern States to promote the uptake in the region.

Objectives

• To provide insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of failure of any of the notified crop as a result of natural calamities, pests & diseases.
• To stabilise the income of farmers to ensure their continuance in farming.
• To encourage farmers to adopt innovative and modern agricultural practices.
• To ensure flow of credit to the agriculture sector.

Beneficiaries: All farmers growing notified crops in a notified area during the season who have insurable interest in the crop are eligible.

Coverage of Crops:

• Oil seeds
• Food crop
• Annual Commercial / Annual Horticultural crops.
• In addition, for perennial crops, pilots for coverage can be taken for those perennial horticultural crops for which standard methodology for yield estimation is available.

Risks covered under the scheme

• Prevented Sowing/Planting/Germination Risk: Insured area is prevented from sowing/planting/germination due to deficit rainfall or adverse seasonal/weather conditions.
• Standing Crop (Sowing to Harvesting): Comprehensive risk insurance is provided to cover yield losses due to non-preventable risks, viz. Drought, Dry spell, Flood, Inundation, widespread Pests and Disease attack, Landslides, Fire due to natural causes, Lightening, Storm, Hailstorm and Cyclone.
• Post-Harvest Losses: Coverage is available only up to a maximum period of two weeks from harvesting, for those crops which are required to be dried in cut and spread / small bundled condition in the field after harvesting against specific perils of Hailstorm, Cyclone, Cyclonic rains and Unseasonal rains
• Localized Calamities: Loss/damage to notified insured crops resulting from occurrence of identified localized risks of Hailstorm, Landslide, Inundation, Cloud burst and Natural fire due to lightening affecting isolated farms in the notified area.
• Add-on coverage for crop loss due to attack by wild animals: The States may consider providing add-on coverage for crop loss due to attack by wild animals wherever the risk is perceived to be substantial and is identifiable.
• General Exclusions: Losses arising out of war and nuclear risks, malicious damage and other preventable risks shall be excluded.

---

Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act

Context:

The Union Home Ministry has placed a US based NGO on its watchlist following an investigation that foreign contributions it sent were being used for climate awareness campaigns, an activity not permissible under the FCRA [Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act].

Relevance:

GS-II: Polity and Governance (Government Policies & Interventions, Non-Governmental Organisations -NGOs), GS-III: Indian Economy (External Sector, Mobilization of Resources)

Dimensions of the Article:

1. Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010
2. Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Act, 2020
3. Issues Related to FCRA

Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010

The Foreign Contribution (regulation) Act, 2010 is a consolidating act whose scope is to regulate the acceptance and utilisation of foreign contribution or foreign hospitality by certain individuals or associations or companies and to prohibit acceptance and utilisation of foreign contribution or foreign hospitality for any activities detrimental to the national interest and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

Key Points regarding FCRA

• Foreign funding of voluntary organizations in India is regulated under FCRA act and is implemented by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
• The FCRA regulates the receipt of funding from sources outside of India to NGOs working in India.
• It prohibits the receipt of foreign contribution “for any activities detrimental to the national interest”.
• The Act held that the government can refuse permission if it believes that the donation to the NGO will adversely affect “public interest” or the “economic interest of the state”. However, there is no clear guidance on what constitutes “public interest”.
• The Acts ensures that the recipients of foreign contributions adhere to the stated purpose for which such contribution has been obtained.
• Under the Act, organisations require to register themselves every five years.

Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Act, 2020

• The Act bars public servants from receiving foreign contributions. Public servant includes any person who is in service or pay of the government, or remunerated by the government for the performance of any public duty.
• The Act prohibits the transfer of foreign contribution to any other person not registered to accept foreign contributions.
• The Act makes Aadhaar number mandatory for all office bearers, directors or key functionaries of a person receiving foreign contribution, as an identification document.
• The Act states that foreign contribution must be received only in an account designated by the bank as FCRA account in such branches of the State Bank of India, New Delhi.
• The Act proposes that not more than 20% of the total foreign funds received could be defrayed for administrative expenses. In FCRA 2010 the limit was 50%.
• The Act allows the central government to permit a person to surrender their registration certificate.

Issues Related to FCRA

• The Act also held that the government can refuse permission if it believes that the donation to the NGO will adversely affect “public interest” or the “economic interest of the state” – however, there is no clear guidance on what constitutes “public interest”.
• By allowing only some political groups to receive foreign donations and disallowing some others, can induce biases in favour of the government. NGOs need to tread carefully when they criticise the regime, knowing that too much criticism could cost their survival. FCRA norms can reduce critical voices by declaring them to be against the public interest – Hence, it can be said that FCRA restrictions have serious consequences on both the rights to free speech and freedom of association under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(c) of the Constitution.
• In 2016, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association undertook a legal analysis of the FCRA and stated that restrictions in the name of “public interest” and “economic interest” failed the test of “legitimate restrictions” as they were too vague and gave the state excessive discretionary powers to apply the provision in an arbitrary manner.

---

Project Dolphin

Context:

The Ministry of Jal Shakti has expressed his concern with the poor pace of Project Dolphin’s approval process.

Relevance:

GS III- Environment (Species in News)

Dimensions of the Article:

1. What is Project Dolphin?
2. Ganges River Dolphins
3. Threats to Gangetic River dolphin
4. Steps Taken to conserve and protect dolphins

What is Project Dolphin?

• The idea received in-principle approval in 2019 at the first meeting of the Prime Minister’s National Ganga Council (NGC).
• Project Dolphin is one of the operations planned as part of Arth Ganga, the government’s ambitious inter-ministerial programme approved in 2019.
• The project will follow in the footsteps of Project Tiger, which has aided in the growth of the tiger population.
• The National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG), which executes the government’s flagship scheme Namami Gange, has taken modest steps toward dolphin conservation so far.
• It is expected to be implemented by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.

Ganges River Dolphins

• The Ganges river dolphin (Platanista gangetica gangetica) was officially discovered in the 1800s and these Ganges river dolphins once lived in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna and Karnaphuli-Sangu river systems of Nepal, India, and Bangladesh. (But the species is extinct from most of its early distribution ranges.)
• The Ganges river dolphin was recognised as the National Aquatic Animal in 2009, by the Government of India.
• The Ganges river dolphin can only survive in freshwater and is essentially blind.
• They are frequently found alone or in small groups, and generally a mother and calf travel together.
• The Indus and Ganges River dolphins are both classified as ‘Endangered’ species by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
• The Ganges dolphin is a Schedule I animal under the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, and has been included in Annexure – I (most endangered) of Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
• The Ganges dolphin is also listed under Appendix II of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) (migratory species that need conservation and management or would significantly benefit from international co-operation).

Threats to Gangetic River dolphin

• Pollution: It faces a number of threats such as dumping of single-use plastics in water bodies, industrial pollution, and fishing.
• Restrictive Flow of Water: The increase in the number of barrages and dams is also affecting their growth as such structures impede the flow of water.
• Poaching: Dolphins are also poached for their flesh, fat, and oil, which is used as a prey to catch fish, as an ointment and as a supposed aphrodisiac.
• Shipping & Dredging: It is also called a blind dolphin because it doesn’t have an eye lens and uses echolocation to navigate and hunt.

Steps Taken to conserve and protect dolphins

• Project Dolphin: The Prime Minister announced the government’s plan to launch a Project Dolphin in his Independence Day Speech 2020. It will be on the lines of Project Tiger, which has helped increase the tiger population.
• Dolphin Sanctuary: Vikramshila Ganges Dolphin Sanctuary has been established in Bihar.
• Conservation Plan: The Conservation Action Plan for the Ganges River Dolphin 2010-2020, which “identified threats to Gangetic Dolphins and impact of river traffic, irrigation canals and depletion of prey-base on Dolphins populations”.
• National Ganga River Dolphin Day: The National Mission for Clean Ganga celebrates 5th October as National Ganga River Dolphin Day.