Syllabus

• Prelims & Mains – POLITY

Context: The Karnataka government on Thursday (September 26) decided to withdraw its earlier notification granting unrestricted permission (general consent) to the CBI to conduct probe in the State.

Background: –

• With this, Karnataka joins many non-BJP ruled States in withdrawing general consent for the CBI in recent years.

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)

• Establishment: The CBI was established in 1963 through a resolution of the Ministry of Home Affairs. It was based on the recommendation of the Santhanam Committee on Prevention of Corruption (1962–1964).
• Legal Status: CBI functions under the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act, 1946. While it is not a statutory body created through an act of Parliament, its powers are derived from the DSPE Act.
• Jurisdiction: The CBI investigates a variety of cases related to corruption, economic crimes, special crimes like serious frauds, murder, kidnapping etc. Its jurisdiction generally extends to Union Territories and, in the case of states, requires the consent of the state government.

General Consent for CBI

• Concept: As per Section 6 of the DSPE Act, the CBI needs general consent from the states to exercise its powers in any state. States have the constitutional right to grant or withdraw this consent.
• General Consent: States typically grant “general consent” to the CBI, which allows it to investigate cases across the state without requiring case-specific permission.
• Withdrawal of General Consent: Several states, such as West Bengal, Maharashtra, Kerala, Punjab, and Chhattisgarh, have withdrawn general consent in recent years due to political and jurisdictional conflicts. When general consent is withdrawn, the CBI cannot investigate cases within that state unless directed by a court (High Court or Supreme Court) or specific consent is given for each case.

Implications of Withdrawal:

• Limited Jurisdiction: CBI’s ability to investigate in states becomes restricted. However, it can still investigate cases referred by courts or Union agencies.
• Federal Tensions: The withdrawal of general consent often reflects tensions between the central and state governments, especially when states perceive central overreach or political bias in CBI investigations.

Relevant Constitutional and Legal Aspects

• Constitutional Provisions: Police is a state subject under the Seventh Schedule (List II) of the Constitution. Therefore, states have jurisdiction over criminal investigation within their territory.
• Supreme Court’s Stand: The Supreme Court has ruled that the CBI can investigate without state consent if ordered by constitutional courts like the High Court or the Supreme Court, making judicial intervention a way for CBI to bypass the withdrawal of general consent.

Source: The Hindu

 Syllabus

• Prelims & Mains – ENVIRONMENT

Context: The Karnataka government decided to reject the Kasturirangan committee report on the protection of the ecologically sensitive areas (ESAs) Western Ghats region from environmental degradation, despite advocating in the last few months that the report would be reviewed.

Background: –

• Cutting across political lines, MLAs and MPs from districts such as Shivamogga, Dakshina Kannada, Udupi, Chikkaamagaluru, Kodagu, and Uttara Kannada, all of which come under the Western Ghats region, have been strongly opposing the implementation of the report.

Kasturirangan Committee on Western Ghats

• The Western Ghats are one of the eight “hottest biodiversity hotspots” in the world and have been declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
• The Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP), headed by Madhav Gadgil, submitted a report in 2011 recommending stringent measures for the protection of the Western Ghats.

• Due to strong opposition from several state governments and local communities, a new high-level working group (HLWG) was formed in 2012 under Dr. K. Kasturirangan to review the Gadgil Committee report.

Key Recommendations:

• Zoning: The committee proposed demarcating 37% of the Western Ghats area (about 60,000 sq km; compared to the 64% suggested by the Gadgil Committee) as Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) across six states (Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu). The state of Karnataka has the highest percentage of the ESA- 46.50 per cent.
• Development Restrictions: The report recommended a blanket ban on mining, quarrying, setting up of red category industries (highly polluting industries) and thermal power projects in ESA. However, activities like agriculture and plantations were allowed with stricter norms.
• Protection of Local Livelihoods: It emphasized the need to balance ecological conservation with the livelihood concerns of local communities, suggesting development activities that are sustainable and eco-friendly.
• Involvement of Local Communities: The report highlighted the importance of decentralized governance and the role of local communities in environmental decision-making.

Challenges:

• Several states opposed the report, fearing that restrictions could impact local economies and development activities.
• The implementation of the recommendations has been delayed due to lack of consensus among states, despite multiple reminders from the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change.

Source: The Hindu

 Syllabus

• Prelims & Mains – POLITY

Context: The Union Home Ministry on Thursday extended the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) in parts of Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh for another six months.

Background:

• Both the State and Union governments can issue notification regarding AFSPA. For the States of Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland, the Ministry issues periodic “disturbed area” notifications.

About Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA)

• The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) is a law that grants special powers to the Indian armed forces in regions classified as “disturbed areas.” It was enacted to maintain public order in areas experiencing insurgencies, militancy, or internal disturbances.
• First enacted: In 1958, the AFSPA was originally introduced to address insurgencies in the Northeast region, particularly in Nagaland.
• Extension to other areas: Over time, the AFSPA was extended to other parts of the country, including Jammu & Kashmir (1990) and various Northeastern states.
• Objective: The primary objective of AFSPA is to empower the armed forces to restore and maintain law and order in “disturbed areas” where civilian authorities are unable to function effectively due to insurgency or militancy.

Key Provisions:

• Power to Declare Areas as Disturbed:
  • The Act allows the central or state government to declare an area “disturbed” if it is experiencing insurgency or conflict.
• Special Powers to the Armed Forces:
  • Search and Arrest: Armed forces personnel can arrest without a warrant, enter and search premises to make arrests or recover weapons.
  • Shoot to Kill: Armed forces can open fire if they believe someone is acting against law and order, provided that due warning has been given.
  • Protection of Armed Forces: Officers acting under the AFSPA are protected from prosecution without prior sanction from the central government.
• Disturbed Area:
  • The AFSPA is applicable in areas that are declared “disturbed” under Section 3 of the Act. The term “disturbed” refers to areas experiencing violence, insurgency, or armed rebellion.

Constitutional Validity:

• Supreme Court’s Ruling: In the case of Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights vs Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the AFSPA but noted that the powers conferred by the Act should be exercised in a reasonable manner.

Criticisms of AFSPA:

• Human Rights Violations: The Act has been criticized for giving excessive powers to armed forces, leading to allegations of human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, torture, and illegal detentions.
• Lack of Accountability: The requirement of prior sanction for prosecution often leads to a lack of accountability for alleged abuses by security forces.
• Alienation of Local Population: AFSPA has often led to alienation of local populations in affected regions, especially in Northeastern India and Jammu & Kashmir, where it is seen as a tool of oppression.

Repeal and Amendments:

• Jeevan Reddy Committee (2005): The committee recommended the repeal of AFSPA, stating that the Act had become a symbol of oppression and that its provisions could be incorporated into other laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
• Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2007): This commission also recommended the repeal of AFSPA or a comprehensive review to make it more humane.

Source: The Hindu

 Syllabus

• Prelims – CURRENT EVENT

Context: With the United Nations (UN) approaching its 80th anniversary next year, the Group of Four (G4) countries — India, Brazil, Germany and Japan — seeking permanent membership and reform of the UN Security Council (UNSC) called for urgent reform of the world body. Other plurilateral groupings, such as the L.69 and C-10 also echoed these calls.

Background: –

• The L.69 group of countries met on Thursday, under the chairmanship of Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Ralph E. Gonsalves. The group held a joint meeting with the C-10 group countries.

About L.69

• The L.69 Group of Developing Countries is a coalition of 32 developing nations from Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, and the Pacific. This group is dedicated to advocating for comprehensive reforms of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).
• Formation: The L.69 Group was established to address the need for a more representative, accountable, and effective UNSC. The Group is bound by the firm conviction that expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership of the Security Council is imperative to better reflect contemporary world realities.
• The Group derives its name from the draft document number “L.69” that the Group had tabled in 2007-08, which led to the initiation of the Intergovernmental Negotiation (IGN) process. The Group had tabled a draft resolution on the “Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters.” At that time, the Group’s membership was of 22 member states, which has since increased to 32 developing countries. The Group meetings are held regularly to coordinate its position on the IGN process currently underway in the United Nations.
• The Mission of India serves as the Secretariat for the meetings of the L.69 Group of Developing Countries.

Member Countries

• The L.69 Group includes a diverse range of countries from different regions:
  • Africa: Nigeria, South Africa, Rwanda, Burundi, Ethiopia, Liberia, Seychelles, Togo.
  • Latin America and the Caribbean: Brazil, Bolivia, Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
  • Asia and the Pacific: India, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Mauritius, Micronesia, Mongolia, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

Key Objectives

• Expansion of Membership: Advocating for the inclusion of more permanent and non-permanent members from developing countries to ensure fair representation.
• Veto Power: Addressing the issue of veto power held by the current permanent members and seeking reforms to make the UNSC more democratic and accountable.

Source: The Hindu

 Syllabus

• Prelims – CURRENT EVENT

Context: India has been elected to the steering committee of the Global Operational Network of Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement Authorities (GlobE Network).

Background: –

• The achievement comes after a rigorous multistage voting process during the fifth plenary meeting in Beijing, where it was represented by the ED and the CBI.

About Global Operational Network of Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement Authorities (GlobE Network)

• The Global Operational Network of Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement Authorities (GlobE Network) was established in 2021 to enhance international cooperation in combating corruption.

Purpose and Establishment

• Purpose: The GlobE Network aims to facilitate transnational cooperation among anti-corruption law enforcement authorities. This includes detecting, investigating, and prosecuting cross-border corruption cases.
• Establishment: It was created following the “Riyadh Initiative” endorsed at the first G20 Anti-Corruption Ministerial Meeting in 2020.

Membership and Governance

• Membership: Open to anti-corruption law enforcement authorities from all UN Member States and States parties to the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC).
• Governance: The network is governed by its members and supported by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), which provides the secretariat.

Functions and Tools

• Secure Communications Platform (SCP): A key tool for the network, enabling swift and secure exchange of information among members.
• Collaboration: The network fosters collaboration among various anti-corruption agencies, police forces, prosecutor’s offices, asset recovery offices, and financial investigation units.
• Support: Provides practical support to investigators and prosecutors, including specialized resources and tools.

Source: Times Of India

 Syllabus

• Mains – GS 2 & GS 3

Context: Recently, China announced its decision to restrict the export of antimony, a critical mineral used in strategic sectors such as defence, for military equipment such as missiles, infrared sensors, flares, ammunition, and even nuclear weapons.

Background: –

• Restricting access to strategic resources is a classic statecraft strategy that China seems to be perfecting.

Critical Minerals:

• They are elements that are the building blocks of essential modern-day technologies and are at risk of supply chain disruptions.
• For example, Antimony, Beryllium, Bismuth, Cobalt, Copper, etc.
• For India, major import sources of Cobalt are China, the US, and Japan; Lithium (Chile, Russia, China); Nickel (Sweden, China), etc.
• These minerals are now used everywhere from making mobile phones, and computers to batteries, electric vehicles, and green technologies like solar panels and wind turbines.
• Based on their individual needs and strategic considerations, different countries create their own lists.

Significance of Critical Minerals for India:

• Minerals such as lithium, graphite, cobalt, titanium, etc. are essential for the advancement of high-tech electronics, telecommunications, transport, etc. Self-sufficiency in critical minerals ensures self-reliance and addresses the vulnerability in its supply chain.
• Some critical minerals are important for climate-friendly technologies like electric vehicles, solar panels wind turbines, etc.
• Critical minerals such as lithium, nickel, and silicon are vital to manufacturing technologies and materials used in the aerospace and defence sector.
• Critical minerals are necessary for India to achieve its geo-economic goals, energy security, renewable energy goals, mineral security, and commitment to electric vehicles by 2030.

Weaponizing the Critical Mineral Supply Chain by China:

• China is a stakeholder and a leader when it comes to critical minerals as it dominates every supply chain segment — upstream, midstream, and downstream, covering mining, extraction, refining, and processing. It enjoys a near-monopoly status, controlling 60% of rare earth production, 60% of critical minerals production, and 80% of the processing worldwide.
• China has grown more comfortable using its mineral resources as a political tool as Beijing is reminding the West of its strategic dependency on China by demonstrating its status as a mineral power and exerting control over the supply chain. China is responding and believes that it is acceptable to take advantage of the situation to sabotage the West’s critical mineral supply chain, which will hinder the development of its high-tech sectors and undermine its efforts to decouple and de-risk.
• China’s intimidating behaviour first gained international attention in the aftermath of the incident in 2010 when a Chinese trawler collided with Japanese Coast Guard boats, after which it halted the exports of rare earth elements to Japan.
• In 2023, following the decision by the Netherlands to restrict the supply of semiconductor equipment, under pressure from the U.S., China announced curbs on the export of gallium and germanium, two critical minerals used in solar cells and computer chips.
• In 2023, after the U.S. announced export control on “advanced computing, semiconductors, and semiconductors manufacturing equipment”, China reciprocated by curbing the export of “high-purity, high-hardness and high-intensity synthetic graphite material and natural flake graphite and its products”, widely used in electric vehicle (EV) batteries, fuel cells, and nuclear reactors.
• China has restricted the export of rare earth processing technologies in making rare earth magnets used in EVs, in addition to technologies used to extract and separate critical minerals, hamstringing the U.S.-led attempt to build an alternative supply chain.
• India is heavily dependent on the imports of critical minerals such as lithium, nickel, cobalt, and copper, which resulted in an import cost of around ₹34,000 crore in FY23. It is estimated that India’s hunger for minerals will only grow, and so will the import cost, further increasing India’s vulnerability.

Source: The Hindu

Q1.) With reference to the L.69 Group of Developing Countries, consider the following statements:

1. The L.69 Group advocates for comprehensive reforms of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), including expansion in both permanent and non-permanent categories of membership.
2. The group is named “69″ as it contains 69 Low income countries.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

a) 1 only

b) 2 only

c) Both 1 and 2

d) Neither 1 nor 2

Q2.) With reference to the Global Operational Network of Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement Authorities (GlobE Network), consider the following statements:

1. The GlobE Network was established following the “Riyadh Initiative” endorsed at the first G20 Anti-Corruption Ministerial Meeting in 2020.
2. The network is exclusively open to G20 member countries and operates under the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

a) 1 only

b) 2 only

c) Both 1 and 2

d) Neither 1 nor 2

Q3.) With reference to the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), consider the following statements:

1. Only Central Government can declare an area as “disturbed” under AFSPA.
2. The Act provides immunity from prosecution to armed forces personnel for actions taken in disturbed areas without the prior sanction of the

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

a) 1 only

b) 2 only

c) Both 1 and 2

d) Neither 1 nor 2

Comment the answers to the above questions in the comment section below!!

ANSWERS FOR ’  27th September 2024 – Daily Practice MCQs’ will be updated along with tomorrow’s Daily Current Affairs

Q.1) –  b

Q.2) – a

Q.3) – c