Daily Current Affairs : 25th & 26th February 2022

by

Daily Current Affairs for UPSC CSE

Topics Covered

  1. UN charter
  2. Tribunals
  3. National Strategy for Additive Manufacturing
  4. History of Ukraine
  5. Lachit Borphukan
  6. Facts for Prelims

1 . UN Charter and War

Background

  • The annexation of Crimea in 2014 by Russia, following the removal of Victor Yanukovych as the President, was the first major military flare-up in the Russo-Ukrainian relations. The Crimean annexation by Russia was met with imposition of sanctions. However, Russia is still in occupation of Crimea, and post 2014 its activities have centred around fomenting separatists in eastern Ukraine
  • . In January 2021, the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appealed the U.S. to let it join NATO, following which Russia started amassing troops near the borders of eastern Ukraine. Tensions escalated quickly from December 2021 when Russia demanded NATO to give up its military activities in eastern Europe and Ukraine, followed by a Russian cyberattack on the Ukrainian government website. On 22 February, Russia recognised the self-declared Donetsk and Luhansk republics in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine, and sent Russian troops to these territories. Finally, yesterday Russia launched a full-scale invasion on Ukraine. The Russian actions have been condemned widely and raise several questions concerning violation of international law.

How is Russia violating the UN Charter?

  • The Charter of the United Nations is the foundational treaty of the United Nations. The principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs is the foundational principle on which existing international order is based.
  • The principle is enshrined in article 2(4) of the UN Charter requiring states to refrain from using force or threat of using force against territorial integrity or political independence of any state. It prohibits any kind of forcible trespassing in the territory of another state, even if it is for temporary or limited operations such as an ‘in and out’ operation. The Russian attack on Ukraine is violative of the non-intervention principle, and amounts to aggression under international law.
  • The UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (1974) defines aggression as the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another state. Additionally, allowing one’s territory to be used by another state for aggression against a third state, also qualifies as an act of aggression.
  • Accordingly, Belarus can also be held responsible for aggression as it has allowed its territory to be used by Russia for attacking Ukraine. Aggression is also considered an international crime under customary international law and the Rome statute establishing the International Criminal Court.
  • Russia’s desire to keep Ukraine out of NATO is a prime reason for its use of force against Ukraine. This is violative of Ukraine’s political independence under article 2(4) as Ukraine being a sovereign state is free to decide which organisations it wants to join. Also, by resorting to use of force, Russia has violated article 2(3) which requires the states to settle their dispute by peaceful means in order to preserve international peace and security.

What about the principle of self-defence?

  • In face of the use of force by Russia, Ukraine has the right to self-defence under international law.
  • The UN Charter under article 51 authorises a state to resort to individual or collective self-defence, until the Security Council take steps to ensure international peace and security. In this case, it seems implausible for the UNSC to arrive at a decision as Russia is a permanent member and has veto power. However, Ukraine has a right under international law to request assistance from other states in form of military assistance, supply of weapons etc.
  • On the other hand, Russia has also claimed that it is acting in self-defence. This claim is questionable, as there has been no use of force, or such threats against Russia by Ukraine. It has been claimed by Russia that Ukraine may acquire nuclear weapons with the help of western allies. However, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Legality of Threat of Nuclear Weapons case held that mere possession of nuclear weapons does not necessarily constitute a threat.
  • Thus, even if Ukraine has, or were to acquire nuclear weapons in the future, it does not become a ground for invoking self defence by Russia. Further, mere membership in a defence alliance such as NATO cannot necessarily be considered as a threat of aggression against Russia. Thus, here too Russia cannot invoke self-defence.
  • Russia can also not invoke anticipatory self defence as such invocation according to the Caroline test would require that the necessity of self defence was instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation. However, this is not the case with Russia.

2 . Tribunals

Context : The Supreme Court said the government’s move to introduce a statute last year on key tribunals, that too, merely days after the court struck down an identical law, may amount to dishonouring its judgment.

About the Petition

  • According to the petition the 2021 Act which abolishes nine key tribunals, raises a serious threat to judicial independence by giving the government wide powers regarding appointments, service conditions, salaries and so on, of members of key tribunals.
  • The petitioners have argued that the Act was introduced in the Lok Sabha just days after the Supreme Court struck down the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance of 2021. The Act brought back the very same provisions in the ordinance which were struck down by the Supreme Court.

Background

  • In July 2021, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court in a 2:1 verdict in Madras Bar Association versus Union of India struck down an ordinance as unconstitutional as it interferes with the independence of the judiciary.
  • Among the thorny provisions in the law is the minimum age criterion of 50 years for appointment of advocates as members of tribunals and the four-year tenure that the amendment prescribes. While the court found the caps arbitrary, the government has argued that the move will bring in a specialised talent pool of advocates to pick from.
  • Apart from the Madras Bar Association ruling, in other cases too, the SC and Parliament have been at loggerheads on the issue of rationalisation of tribunals.
  • In the Roger Mathew v Union of India case, a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by then CJI Ranjan Gogoi struck down an amendment to the 2017 Finance Act, passed as a money Bill, that altered the structure and functioning of various tribunals.
  • The bench, which also comprised Justices Ramana and D Y Chandrachud, directed the government to formulate fresh norms on the appointment of tribunal members.
  • The Madras Bar Association had in two other instances — in 2010 and 2015 — challenged various provisions relating to the establishment of the National Company Law Tribunal. In two judgments, the SC had interpreted provisions relating to the appointment of members to align with the independence of the judiciary.

About Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2021

  • The Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2021 replaces a similar Ordinance promulgated in April 2021 that sought to dissolve eight tribunals that functioned as appellate bodies to hear disputes under various statutes, and transferred their functions to existing judicial forums such as a civil court or a High Court.
  • The Bill states that the Chairpersons and Members of the tribunal being abolished shall cease to hold office, and they will be entitled to claim compensation equivalent to three months’ pay and allowances for their premature termination.
  • It also proposes changes in the process of appointment of certain other tribunals.
  • While the Bill provides for uniform pay and rules for the search and selection committees across tribunals, it also provides for removal of tribunal members.
  • It states that the central government shall, on the recommendation of the Search-cum-Selection Committee, remove from office any Chairperson or a Member, who—
    • (a) has been adjudged as an insolvent; or
    • (b) has been convicted of an offence which involves moral turpitude; or
    • (c) has become physically or mentally incapable of acting as such Chairperson or Member; or
    • (d) has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as such Chairperson or Member; or
    • (e) has so abused his position as to render his continuance in office prejudicial to the public interest.
  • Chairpersons and judicial members of tribunals are former judges of High Courts and the Supreme Court. While the move brings greater accountability on the functioning of the tribunals, it also raises questions on the independence of these judicial bodies.
  • In the Search-cum-Selection Committee for state tribunals, the Bill brings in the Chief Secretary of the state and the Chairman of the Public Service Commission of the concerned state who will have a vote and Secretary or Principal Secretary of the state’s General Administrative Department with no voting right. This gives the government a foot in the door in the process. The Chief Justice of the High Court, who would head the committee, will not have a casting vote.

About Tribunals

  • Tribunals are judicial or quasi-judicial institutions established by law
  • They intend to provide a platform for faster adjudication as compared to traditional courts, as well as expertise on certain subject matters.
  • Pendency of cases in courts is one of the key challenges faced by the judicial system. As of June 6, 2021, there are 91,885 cases pending for more than 30 years in different High Courts of India. As of May 1, 2021, there are 67,898 pending cases in the Supreme Court.
  • The Law Commission of India (2017) noted that pendency in courts leads to delays in the administration of justice, thereby, impacting efficiency of the judicial system.   Further, it noted that in certain technical cases, the traditional courts need expert knowledge for adjudication.

Constitutional Provisions

  •  In 1976, Articles 323A and 323B were inserted in the Constitution of India through the 42nd Amendment.  Article 323A empowered Parliament to constitute administrative Tribunals (both at central and state level) for adjudication of matters related to recruitment and conditions of service of public servants.  
  • Article 323B specified certain subjects (such as taxation and land reforms) for which Parliament or state legislatures may constitute tribunals by enacting a law.  
  • In 2010, the Supreme Court clarified that the subject matters under Article 323B are not exclusive, and legislatures are empowered to create tribunals on any subject matters under their purview as specified in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.
  • Currently, tribunals have been created both as substitutes to High Courts and as subordinate to High Courts.  In the former case, appeals from the decisions of Tribunals (such as the Securities Appellate Tribunal) lie directly with the Supreme Court.  In the latter case (such as the Appellate Board under the Copyright Act, 1957), appeals are heard by the corresponding High Court
  •  The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was created in 1941 to reduce pendency of cases in courts.  After the insertion of Articles 323A and 323B, several tribunals such as the Central Administrative Tribunal as well as sector specific tribunals were set up from the 1980s to 2010s.  The Finance Act, 2017 consolidated several tribunals.  In 2021, a Bill has been introduced that abolishes nine tribunals and transfers the matters to courts.

3 . National Strategy for Additive Manufacturing

Context : National Strategy on Additive Manufacturing was released by the govt to cater next-generation digital manufacturing and mitigate immediate disabilities of local industries

About Additive Manufacturing

  • Additive manufacturing (AM) or additive layer manufacturing (ALM) is the industrial production name for 3D printing, a computer controlled process that creates three dimensional objects by depositing materials, usually in layers.

Salient Features of the Strategy

  • The Strategy aspires to achieve 5% of Global AM market share and thereto add nearly US$ 1Bn to the GDP by 2025. This will create eco-system for creation of nearly 100 new Start-ups, 10 AM sectors and 1 lakh new skilled manpower, besides, development of 500 AM products and 50 Indian AM technologies on material, machine, process and software. In addition, awareness for adoption of AM products to facilitate this growth will be created.
  • The national strategy would postulate the tenets of ‘Make in India’ and ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat Abhiyan’ that advocate self-reliance through technological transformation of the production paradigm, which will be realized through a dedicated National Centre with the participation of all stakeholders. This centre will act as an aggregator of knowledge and resources to accelerate technology adoption and advancement. The sector specific Centres will also be created to infuse indigenous AM technology to offer Indian manufactures an edge over global peers. 
  • With the release of the Strategy by Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology, Innovation and R&D ecosystem will be encouraged in PPP mode to transform existing research knowledgebase to develop Additive Manufacturing grade materials, 3D printer machines and printed indigenous products for vast domestic and international market in various sectors including electronics, photonics, medical device, agro and food processing etc.

4 . History of Ukraine

Context : According to Putin, modern Ukraine was “entirely and fully created by Russia, more specifically the Bolshevik, communist Russia… This process began practically immediately after the 1917 revolution, and moreover Lenin and his associates did it in the sloppiest way in relation to Russia — by dividing, tearing from her pieces of her own historical territory”.

Area, demography, economy

  • Ukraine is in the east of Europe, and is bound by Russia to its northeast, east, and southeast, and the Black Sea in the south. In the southwest, west, and north, Ukraine shares borders, in the clockwise direction, with Moldova, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, and Belarus.
  • It is the largest country in Europe after Russia itself, with an area of 603,550 sq km, or about 6% of the continent. Ukraine is, of course, dwarfed by Russia, which sprawls over almost 4 million sq km and 40% of Europe.
  • In July 2021, Ukraine’s population was estimated at 43.7 million. Of this, 77.8% was of Ukrainian ethnicity and 17.3% was Russian, and Ukrainian and Russian speakers made up 67.5% and 29.6% of the population respectively (2001 estimates, CIA World Factbook).
  • The Russian speakers live mostly in the east, close to the border with Russia, where the Russian government, after encouraging and sustaining an armed insurgency for eight years, this week recognised two independent republics, signalling the inevitable war that followed
  • Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe in terms of gross domestic product and gross national income per capita. It has deposits of iron ore and coal, and exports corn, sunflower oil, iron and iron products, and wheat.
  • India is Ukraine’s largest export destination in the Asia Pacific region. The country’s major export to India is sunflower oil, followed by inorganic chemicals, iron and steel, plastics, and chemicals. Ukraine’s major import from India is pharmaceutical products.

Early history of Ukraine

  • A millennium ago, what is Ukraine today lay at the heart of the Kyivan Rus’ (Rus’ land), a federation of the East Slavic, Baltic, and Finnic peoples of eastern and northern Europe, with its capital in Kyiv. Modern Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus all trace their cultural ancestry to the Kyivan Rus’.
  • The Kyivan Rus’ reached ts greatest size and power in the 10th and 11th centuries. In 988 AD, the Grand Prince of Kyiv, Vladimir (Volodymyr) the Great, made Christianity the state religion. The peak of the Kyivan Rus’ came under Yaroslav the Wise, who ruled from 1019-54.
  • In the mid-13th century, the Kyivan Rus’, weakened by the decline of trade as the Byzantine Empire collapsed, fell apart under the onslaught of the Mongol Golden Horde, who sacked Kyiv in 1240. After the Mongol khanate disintegrated in the early 15th century, however, large parts of the former Kyivan Rus’ were incorporated into the multi-ethnic Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
  • By the Union of Lublin, Poland, in 1569, the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania came together to form the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which was among Europe’s biggest countries at the time. The beginnings of the modern Ukrainian national identity can be traced back to about a century after this event

Incorporation into Russia

  • In 1648, Cossacks under Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky rose in revolt against the Poles, took control of Kyiv, and founded the Ukrainian state of Cossack Hetmanate in the area that is today’s central Ukraine. After about a century, however, Empress Catherine the Great (1762-96) of Russia abolished the hetmante, and absorbed the entire ethnic Ukrainian territory into the Russian Empire.
  • The Tsarist policy of Russification led to the suppression of ethnic identities and languages, including that of the Ukrainians. Within the Russian Empire though, many Ukrainians rose to positions of prosperity and importance, and significant numbers migrated to settle in other parts of Russia.
  • More than 3.5 million Ukrainians fought in World War I on the side of the Russian Empire, but a smaller number fought against the Tsar’s army with the Austro-Hungarians.

Ukraine as part of USSR

  • The war led to the end of both the Tsarist and Ottoman empires. As a mainly communist-led Ukrainian national movement emerged, several small Ukrainian states sprang up. Months after the Bolsheviks took power in the October Revolution of 1917, an independent Ukrainian People’s Republic was proclaimed, but a civil war continued between various claimants to power, including Ukrainian factions, anarchists, Tsarists, and Poland. In 1922, Ukraine became part of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).

After the Soviet collapse

  • In 1991, the USSR was dissolved. Demands for independence had been growing in Ukraine for a couple of years previously, and in 1990, over 300,000 Ukrainians created a human chain in support of freedom, and the so-called Granite Revolution of students sought to prevent the signing of a new agreement with the USSR.
  • On August 24, 1991, after the failure of the coup to remove President Mikhail Gorbachev and restore the communists to power, the parliament of Ukraine adopted the country’s Act of Independence. Subsequently, Leonid Kravchuk, head of the parliament, was elected Ukraine’s first President.
  • In December 1991, the leaders of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine formally dissolved the Soviet Union and formed the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). However, Ukraine’s parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, never ratified the accession, so Ukraine was legally never a member of the CIS.

5 . Lachit Borphukan

Context : In Assam on a three-day visit, President Ram Nath Kovind on Friday inaugurated the year-long celebration of the 400th birth anniversary of Lachit Borphukan. He laid the foundation stone for the Alaboi war memorial, a tribute to soldiers who had fought and suffered a setback against the Mughals at Alaboi, two years before Lachit’s decisive victory at the battle of Saraighat in 1671. Earlier this week, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma had announced a number of projects in connection with the anniversary. Along with the Alaboi war memorial at Dadara, a Lachit Samadhi would be built this year over 22 bighas of land.

About Lachit Borphukan

  • Lachit Borphukan was the commander of the Ahom forces and an icon of Assamese nationalism.
  • Ahom kings ruled large parts of what is now Assam, and parts of what are neighbouring states today, for nearly 600 years between the 13th and 19th centuries.
  • Between 1615 and 1682, the Mughal Empire made a series of attempts, under Jahangir and then Aurangzeb, to annex the Ahom kingdom. In January 1662, Mughal Governor of Bengal Mir Jumla’s forces engaged with the Ahom army and went on to occupy part of the territory under Ahom rule.
  • Between 1667 and 1682, the Ahoms under a series of rulers, starting with Chakradhwaj Singha, (reigned 1663-70) launched a counter-offensive to reclaim lost territories. This included the battles Lachit is remembered for.

Alaboi and Saraighat

  • In 1669, Aurangzeb dispatched the Rajput Raja Ram Singh I to recapture territories won back by the Ahoms.
  • The battle of Alaboi was fought on August 5, 1669 in the Alaboi Hills near Dadara in North Guwahati.
  • While the Mughals preferred an open battle, Borphukan relied on his knowledge of the territory and engaged in guerrilla warfare, carrying out assaults on the Mughals. After initial setbacks, Ram Singh sent his entire battery of Rajput soldiers and Mughal veterans and turned the tide of the battle. Ten thousand Ahoms died in the battle, according to a paper posted on the website of Assam’s archaeology department.
  • Unlike in Alaboi, where he was forced to fight on land instead of a naval battle, Lachit in Saraighat enticed the Mughals into a naval battle.
  • According to the historian H K Barpujari (The Comprehensive History of Assam), Ahom forces combined a frontal attack and a surprise attack from behind. They lured the Mughal fleet into moving ahead by feigning an attack with a few ships from the front. The Mughals vacated the waters behind them, from where the main Ahom fleet attacked and achieved a decisive victory.
  • Historians describe how Ram Singh wrote to Aurangzeb that every Assamese soldier had expertise in rowing boats, shooting arrows, digging trenches and wielding guns and cannons. “I have not seen such specimens of versatility in any other part of India. Glory to the King. Glory to the Commander. One single individual leads all the forces. Even I, Ram Singh, being personally on the spot, have not been able to find any loophole,” historians quote his letter as saying.

6 . Facts for Prelims

Dharma Guardian Exercise

  • Dharma Guardian is the name of an Indo-Japan Joint Military Exercise 
  • The exercise will “enhance the level of defence co-operation between Indian Army and Japanese Ground Self Defence Forces, which in turn will further foster the bilateral relations between the two nations.
  • The exercise with Japan “is crucial and significant in terms of security challenges faced by both nations in the backdrop of current global situation” and the “scope of this exercise covers platoon level joint training on operations in jungle and semi-urban/urban terrain

Leave a comment

error: DMCA Protected Copying the content by other websites are prohibited and will invite legal action. © iassquad.in