Daily Current Affairs for UPSC CSE
Topics Covered
- Postal Ballot for NRI’s
- Rules for tapping a phone
- Joint & Dual degrees from Indian, foreign univs
- China Security Pact
- Excess Deaths
- Falkland issue
- Facts for Prelims
1 . Postal Ballot for NRI’s
Context : Chief Election Commissioner Sushil Chandra, during a recent visit to South Africa and Mauritius, urged Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) to register as overseas electors and told them that a proposal on postal ballots for NRIs was being contemplated, the Election Commission of India said on Friday. He also shared with the members that extension of Electronically Transmitted Postal Ballot System (ETPBS) facility to overseas voters is being contemplated,” the ECI said.
What is ETPBS and how does it function?
- The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 was amended in 2016 to allow service voters to use the ETPBS.
- Under this system, postal ballots are sent electronically to registered service voters. The service voter can then download the ETPB (along with a declaration form and covers), register their mandate on the ballot and send it to the returning officer of the constituency via ordinary mail. The post will include an attested declaration form (after being signed by the voter in the presence of an appointed senior officer who will attest it). The postal ballot must reach the returning officer by 8 a.m. on the day of the counting of results.
- In the case of NRI voters, those seeking to vote through ETPBS will have to inform the returning officer at least five days after notification of the election. The returning officer will then send the ballot electronically via the ETPBS.
- The NRI voter can then register her/his mandate on the ballot printout and send it back with an attested declaration in a process similar to the service voter. Except in this case, the senior officer would be appointed by the Indian diplomatic or consular representative in the resident country of the NRI. The ECI has not specified whether the voter should send in the ballot through ordinary post to the returning officer or drop it off at the Indian consular office/embassy, which will then send the envelopes constituency-wise to the returning officers.
- The ECI proposed to extend this facility to overseas votersl. For this to commence, the Law Ministry has to amend the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961
2 . Rules for Tapping a Phone
Context : Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut claimed that the Centre is protecting IPS officer Rashmi Shukla, now posted with the CRPF. Shukla is facing an FIR in Mumbai and is being probed for allegedly tapping the phones of Rajya Sabha MP Raut and NCP leader Eknath Khadse in 2019, when she was heading the State Intelligence Department in Maharashtra.
How are phones tapped in India?
- In the era of fixed-line phones, mechanical exchanges would link circuits together to route the audio signal from the call. When exchanges went digital, tapping was done through a computer.
- Today, when most conversations happen through mobile phones, authorities make a request to the service provider, which is bound by law to record the conversations on the given number and provide these in real time through a connected computer.
Who can tap phones?
- In the states, police have the powers to tap phones. At the Centre, 10 agencies are authorised to do so: Intelligence Bureau, CBI, Enforcement Directorate, Narcotics Control Bureau, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, National Investigation Agency, R&AW, Directorate of Signal Intelligence, and the Delhi Police Commissioner. Tapping by any other agency would be considered illegal
What laws govern this?
- Phone tapping in India is governed by the The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.
- Section 5(2) says that “on the occurrence of any public emergency, or in the interest of the public safety”, phone tapping can be done by the Centre or states if they are satisfied it is necessary in the interest of “public safety”, “sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence”.
- There is an exception for the press : “press messages intended to be published in India of correspondents accredited to the Central Government or a State Government shall not be intercepted or detained, unless their transmission has been prohibited under this sub-section”.
- The competent authority must record reasons for tapping in writing.
Who authorises phone tapping?
- Rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph (Amendment) Rules, 2007, says phone tapping orders “shall not be issued except by an order made by the Secretary to the Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs in the case of Government of India and by the Secretary to the State Government in-charge of the Home Department in the case of a State Government”. The order has to conveyed to the service provider in writing; only then can the tapping begin
What happens in an emergency?
- In unavoidable circumstances, such an order may be issued by an officer, not below the rank of a Joint Secretary to the Government of India, who has been authorised by the Union Home Secretary, or the State Home Secretary.
- In remote areas or for operational reasons, if it is not feasible to get prior directions, a call can be intercepted with the prior approval of the head or the second senior-most officer of the authorised law enforcement agency at the central level, and by authorised officers, not below the rank of Inspector General of Police, at the state level.
- The order has to be communicated within three days to the competent authority, who has to approve or disapprove it within seven working days. “If the confirmation from the competent authority is not received within the stipulated seven days, such interception shall cease,” the rule says.
- For example, during the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai, the authorities had no time to follow the complete procedure, and so a mail was sent to the service provider by the Intelligence Bureau, and phones of terrorists were put under surveillance. “The proper procedure was followed later. Many times, in grave situations such as terror attacks, service providers are approached with even verbal requests, which they honour in the interest of the nation’s security,” an intelligence official said.
What are the checks against misuse?
- The law is clear that interception must be ordered only if there is no other way of getting the information.
- “While issuing directions under sub-rule (1) the officer shall consider possibility of acquiring the necessary information by other means and the directions under sub-rule (1) shall be issued only when it is not possible to acquire the information by any other reasonable means,” Rule 419A says.
- The directions for interception remain in force, unless revoked earlier, for a period not exceeding 60 days. They may be renewed, but not beyond a total of 180 days.
- Any order issued by the competent authority has to contain reasons, and a copy is to be forwarded to a review committee within seven working days. At the Centre, the committee is headed by the Cabinet Secretary with the Law and Telecom Secretaries as members. In states, it is headed by the Chief Secretary with the Law and Home Secretaries as members.
- The committee is expected to meet at least once in two months to review all interception requests. “When the Review Committee is of the opinion that the directions are not in accordance with the provisions referred to above it may set aside the directions and orders for destruction of the copies of the intercepted message or class of messages,” the law says.
- Under the rules, records pertaining to such directions shall be destroyed every six months unless these are, or are likely to be, required for functional requirements. Service providers too are required to destroy records pertaining to directions for interception within two months of discontinuance of the interception.
Is the process transparent?
- There are multiple provisions aimed at keeping the process transparent.
- Directions for interception are to specify the name and designation of the officer or the authority to whom the intercepted call is to be disclosed, and also specify that the use of intercepted call shall be subject to provisions of Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act.
- The directions have to be conveyed to designated officers of the service providers in writing by an officer not below the rank of SP or Additional SP or equivalent. The officer is expected to maintain records with details of the intercepted call, the person whose message has been intercepted, the authority to whom the intercepted calls have been disclosed, date of destruction of copies etc.
- The designated nodal officers of the service providers are supposed to issue acknowledgment letters to the security/law enforcement agency within two hours on receipt of an intimation. They are to forward every 15 days a list of interception authorisations received to the nodal officers of the security and law enforcement agencies for confirmation of authenticity.
- “The service providers shall put in place adequate and effective internal checks to ensure that unauthorised interception of messages does not take place and extreme secrecy is maintained…,” the rule says.
- It makes the service providers responsible for actions of their employees. In case of unauthorised interception, the service provider may be fined or even lose its licence.
3 . Joint & Dual degrees from Indian, foreign univs
Context : The rules governing tie-ups between Indian and foreign higher educational institutions have been simplified by the University Grants Commission (UGC) to expand the net of academic collaborations.
Which regulations have been amended?
- The UGC sets minimum standards for many areas of higher education ranging from academic standards to quality of training imparted to teachers. In this case, the UGC had in 2012 issued regulations on tie-ups that Indian and foreign universities can forge.
- The regulations were further amended in 2016 after it emerged that academic collaborations were not picking up despite provisions being in place. But the 2016 amendment did not help much either, necessitating the latest set of changes.
- The University Grants Commission (Academic Collaboration between Indian and Foreign Higher Education Institutions to offer Joint Degree, Dual Degree, and Twinning Programmes) Regulations, 2022 will govern twinning programmes, joint degree, and dual degree programmes to be offered jointly by Indian and foreign universities.
What do the regulations say on twinning programmes?
- In the twinning programme, students will be enrolled in a degree programme at an Indian institute and they will get an opportunity to undergo an exchange programme with the partner foreign university.
- Students will have to complete up to 30 per cent of the course’s credits at the foreign institution by means of an exchange programme.
- The same will be applicable to foreign students enrolling in a similar programme. The degree at the end of the course will be provided by the Indian institution.
How will the dual-degrees be structured?
- The dual-degrees, introduced for the first time, will enable a student to earn two degrees for a course of the same discipline, and at the same level. Students will have to complete at least 30 per cent of their course credit at the foreign institution. For example, a student enrolled in a BA English programme in an Indian university can pursue a part of her course at a foreign institution.
- At the end of the course, the student will be awarded two degrees, separately and simultaneously, by the Indian and foreign institutions. This shall not, in any way, be construed as two degree programmes in separate disciplines or subject areas at two different levels, the UGC has clarified.
- This means a dual degree in BA English and BSc Physics, or BSc Maths and MSc Biology will not be allowed under this arrangement
How will joint degree programmes be different from dual degrees?
- Unlike dual degree, in the case of joint degree programmes, there will be one degree certificate, bearing the names of both the institutions. The curriculum will be jointly designed by the collaborating institutions like in the case of dual degrees.
- Students from India will be required to complete at least 30 per cent of their course credit at the foreign institution. In the case of joint doctoral programmes, the students will have a supervisor at both the participating institutes and will have to spend at least a semester at the collaborating institutes. The student will submit a single thesis adhering to a framework jointly devised by the participating institutions.
How can institutes partner with each other and what will be the eligibility criteria?
- Any Indian higher educational institution accredited by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) with a minimum score of 3.01 on a 4-point scale or featuring in the top 1,000 of Times Higher Education (THE) or QS World University Rankings will be eligible to participate.
- For Indian institutes, being in the top 100 list of the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) is also an acceptable criterion. Foreign institutes willing to enter a partnership must rank in the top 1,000 in either of the two world university rankings. The Indian institutions willing to enter into such collaborative arrangements will also have to open office for international affairs.
How have the rules been simplified?
- The previous set of regulations gave the UGC extensive powers to monitor the entire process of collaboration, ranging from examining MoUs between institutes to issuing letters of approvals or rejections.
- The proposed amendments obviates the need for institutes to seek the UGC’s nod. However, in the case of professional programmes in disciplines such as engineering, medicine and law, the approval of statutory councils or bodies like the AICTE will still be needed.
- The Indian institutes looking to offer such programmes will need the clearances of their in-house academic bodies such as board of governors, executive councils etc.
- The second step for them would be to sign MoUs with the partner foreign institutes. Earlier, such MoUs required the approval of the UGC.
4 . Excess Death
Context : Reports published in the website devex.com and The New York Times indicate that the World Health Organization (WHO) was set to release an estimate of excess deaths during the pandemic period the world over and that the report had been delayed for months because of objections from the Indian government. The report is expected to show at least 4 million excess deaths in India, the highest such tally for any country in the world, according to the NYT. The Indian government responded to the report saying its basic objection to the report centred on the “methodology adopted for the same”.
What are excess deaths? How are they measured?
- The excess deaths approach to calculating mortality considers the difference between the registered deaths before the pandemic and those during the pandemic period. This gives a robust estimate of the true impact of the pandemic — deaths due to the disease and those that occurred because of the pandemic overwhelming health systems among others.
- In most developed countries, death registration is full or nearly full and therefore, calculating excess deaths is relatively easier as deaths data are reliable and readily available. In such countries, most deaths are medically certified with cause of mortality and therefore a clear picture on excess deaths with causality can emerge quickly. Countries such as the U.S., the U.K., Italy and Germany, for instance, have near 100% registration of deaths with the cause of mortality known in every case, enabling excess deaths to be known in near real time.
Issues with India
- The corresponding figure for India is 92% (as per the Annual Report on Vital Statistics of India based on Civil Registration System-2019) and only 20.7% of the deaths are medically certified. There is substantial variation in registration and certification across States in India. .
- Besides there is variation in the online availability of death registration numbers and there is also a significant variation in the delay in registration of deaths across States. Only in 11 of them, 90% of deaths are registered within 21 days of occurrence; there are 10 States including Karnataka and Kerala, where deaths registration is 100%, where 50% to 80% of the deaths are registered within 21 days and in two (Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh), less than 50% of the deaths are registered in this manner.
- Therefore, for countries like India, calculating excess deaths is not an easy task. The best way to do it is to individually calculate excess deaths for States with near 100% registration (based on a proper baseline for comparison) and to use suitable models to extrapolate deaths from limited data in others.
What are the findings by the WHO? How did they go about it?
- The WHO has not released the final report as yet. But the report in The New York Times says that the excess deaths estimated by the WHO in India exceeded 4 million, nearly eight times the reported death toll of more than 5.2 lakh.
- Explaining the methodology in an extract from the unreleased WHO report, that they based their estimates on all-cause mortality data from 17 States and one Union Territory in India. They used this approach — using data from subnational regions — in Argentina, China, Indonesia and Turkey as well, where national all-cause mortality data was not available.
- They go on to add, “for India, we use a variety of sources for the registered number of deaths at the State and Union Territory level. The information was either reported directly by the States through official reports and automatic vital registration, or by journalists who obtained death registration information through Right to Information requests”. They then estimate the total number of excess deaths for the country by looking at the variations in the subnational level and their contributions to the overall death toll before the pandemic and the data for these subregions during the pandemic.
Why is the Indian government dismissive of the report?
- Reacting to the NYT report, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare stated it was concerned as “to how the statistical model projects estimates for a country of geographical size and population of India also fits in with other countries which have [a] smaller population.
- Such one-size-fits-all approach and models which are true for smaller countries… may not be applicable to India”. It also said that “the model gives two highly different sets of excess mortality estimates… when using the data from Tier I countries and when using unverified data from 18 Indian States.”
- The authors of the WHO report emphasise that “for India the global predictive covariate model is not used and so the estimates of excess mortality are based on data from India only”, thereby negating the argument from the Health Ministry that a “one-size-fits-all approach model” was used.
- Other concerns such as an assumption of “inverse relationship between monthly temperature and monthly average deaths”, besides lack of uniformity in “test positivity rate” expressed in the Ministry’s press release, do not seem to be borne out in the method as described by the authors in their extract from the WHO report.
- The Ministry also claims that the data published in the newspapers were “unverified”,though these were data that was accessed through various means, including Right to Information requests from the Civil Registration System for States for whom this data was available. The full report by the WHO should enable us to assess the pandemic’s true impact in India.
5 . China Security deal with Solomon Islands
Context : China’s government, on April 19, said that it had signed a security deal with the Solomon Islands. The pact, signed by the two foreign ministers, Wang Yi and Jeremiah Manele, paves the way for China to deploy security forces in the Pacific island nation as well as for the Chinese Navy, which has been rapidly growing its fleet and spreading its reach far from China’s shores, to use the island nation’s ports. Giving China a strategic foothold in the Pacific, the agreement evoked concern from Australia and the United States, which despatched top officials earlier this week to the Solomon Islands, emerging as the latest flashpoint between the world’s two biggest powers.
What does the security agreement entail?
- The final agreement has not been made public, though it is thought to be along the lines of a draft that was leaked last month.
- The document listed seven articles, the first of which said the “Solomon Islands may, according to its own needs, request China to send police, armed police, military personnel and other law enforcement and armed forces to Solomon Islands to assist in maintaining social order, protecting people’s lives and property, providing humanitarian assistance, carrying out disaster response, or providing assistance on other tasks agreed upon by the parties.”
- It added that “China may, according to its own needs and with the consent of Solomon Islands, make ship visits, carry out logistical replenishment in, and have stopover and transition in Solomon Islands and the relevant forces of China can be used to protect the safety of Chinese personnel and major projects in Solomon Islands.”
- The other articles were related to how requests for Chinese security deployment may be sent, confidentiality to prevent either side from making the arrangements public to a third party, and the duration of the agreement, which will run for five years and may be extended.
What has been the response from other countries?
- Given its close proximity to the Solomon Islands, Australia has expressed concern, with Foreign Minister Marise Payne saying Australia was “deeply disappointed” and “concerned about the lack of transparency with which this agreement has been developed, noting its potential to undermine stability in our region”.
- The White House said both sides “engaged in substantial discussion around the recently signed security agreement between Solomon Islands and the People’s Republic of China”, noting that while Solomon Islands representatives indicated that “the agreement had solely domestic applications” the U.S. side “noted there are potential regional security implications of the accord.” “If steps are taken to establish a de facto permanent military presence, power-projection capabilities, or a military installation,” the U.S. said, it “would then have significant concerns and respond accordingly.” Prime Minister Sogavare assured Washington there would be “no military base, no long-term presence, and no power projection capability”.
What are the implications for China’s military and security ambitions abroad?
- In 2017, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) put into operation its first foreign base in Djibouti, near the Horn of Africa, to service Chinese ships in the Indian Ocean.
- Since then, PLA experts have said Beijing is keen to tie up more such arrangements as it speeds up building a blue water navy, with a third aircraft carrier expected to be launched this year. Chinese analysts have said possible future ports include Karachi in Pakistan off the Arabian Sea, Cambodia to access the Gulf of Thailand and South China Sea, and even Equatorial Guinea for China’s first foothold in the Atlantic.
- Even if the Solomon Islands might not become a future base, the pact is significant in reflecting China’s willingness to deploy its forces abroad. Experts say more agreements may be in the works.
- Chinese counter-terrorism forces, reports have said, have already established a small presence in a base in Tajikistan near the China-Afghanistan border to monitor threats emanating from Afghanistan.
- China last year sent its own security team to Pakistan to investigate a blast at the Dasu hydropower project that killed nine Chinese workers, and has begun to carry out joint patrols with Pakistan in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
6 . Falkland issue between UK and Argentina
Context : The Government of Argentina will launch a campaign in India on Sunday demanding negotiation with the United Kingdom to settle the territorial dispute over the Islas Malvinas that are known as the Falkland Islands in the United Kingdom.
What is this dispute about?
- Since the 18th century, the Falkland Islands, located off the coast of Argentina in the south Atlantic Ocean, have always been subjected to colonisation and conquests by Britain, France, Spain and Argentina.
- Prior to the 1700s, the islands were uninhabited, with France first establishing a colony there in 1764. The next year, when the British arrived to claim the islands for themselves, it marked the start of a dispute that has been ongoing ever since. By 1811, colonial powers had left, with the islands largely being used and visited by sealing and whaling ships.
- But in November 1820, an American privateer David Jewett once again kick-started a fresh dispute that till then had significantly subsided, by claiming possession of the islands on behalf of Argentina.
- Over a period of two decades, minor conflicts followed between Argentina and Britain, with both asserting dominance over the other, alternatively finding victory in the conflict. That ended in 1840, when the Falklands became a Crown colony and Britain sent Scottish settlers to officially establish a community, one that was largely pastoral.
- Strategically, the Falkland Islands were important to Britain and that was evident in how they were used by London as a military base in the South Atlantic Ocean, both during the First and Second World War. However, following the end of the Second World War, the islands once again became a cause of dispute between the United Kingdom and Argentina, with both asserting sovereignty over the islands.
What happened to the islands post WWII?
- The dispute continued in the post WWII global scenario. Argentina’s assertion of sovereignty over the Falkland Islands during the presidency of Juan Perón briefly soured relations with the United Kingdom.
- In December, 1965, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 2065, a non-binding resolution that recognized the existence of a sovereignty dispute between the United Kingdom and Argentina over these islands, that urged both countries to find a peaceful solution to the dispute.
- Over the next three years, both Argentina and the United Kingdom held talks about the islands, but those were impeded because settlers in the Falklands, who were originally from the United Kingdom dissented, forcing a halt to all negotiations between the countries till 1977.
- In the run up to the war, the United Kingdom’s Thatcher government strongly considered handing over the Falkland Islands to Argentina because of difficulties in financially maintaining the islands. In the background of these developments, conflict between the two countries over these islands were bubbling beneath the surface.
How did the Falklands War break out?
- Insisting that the United Kingdom had illegally taken the Falkland Islands from them, Argentina invaded the islands in 1982, sparking the Falklands War.
- The United Kingdom was not prepared for the attack and plans had to be rapidly put into motion. London was at a disadvantage because of the geographical location of the islands, approximately 7,000 nautical miles away. A little over two months after it broke out, the war ended with the United Kingdom’s victory.
7 . Facts for Prelims
Blue straggler
- A blue straggler is a main-sequence star in an open or globular cluster that is more luminous and bluer than stars at the main sequence turnoff point for the cluster. Blue stragglers were first discovered by Allan Sandage in 1953 while performing photometry of the stars in the globular cluster M3.
- Our Sun, for example, is what is called a main sequence star, and, given its mass and age, it is expected that once it has converted all its hydrogen into helium, its core will get denser, while outer layers expand. So, it will bloat into a red giant. After this phase, its fuel spent, it will shrink, becoming a smaller, cooling star called a white dwarf star at the end of its life.
Biochar
- Biochar is defined as a carbon-rich material produced during pyrolysis process that is a thermochemical decomposition of biomass with a temperature about ≤700°C in the absence or limited supply of oxygen
- Apart from safekeeping carbon, biochar has several uses in agriculture. Agricultural leftovers such as rice husk are a major source of biomass, and the biochar it forms has significant mineral content. Adding it to soil enriches plant nutrients. The porous nature of biochar makes it suitable for remediation — the adsorption of toxic substances in polluted soils – thus reducing the potency of contaminants in the soil (Annals Agric. Sci., 2019). Biomass, be it from banana peel, or tree bark or poultry manure, thus improves air quality and adds value to agricultural produce