POLITY AND GOVERNANCE

1. THE MOTHER TONGUE SURVEY OF INDIA

THE CONTEXT: Recently, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has completed the Mother Tongue Survey of India (MTSI) with field videography of the country’s 576 languages.

THE EXPLANATION:

• According to Home Ministry, “In order to preserve and analyse the original flavour of each indigenous Mother Tongue, it has been planned to set up a web-archive at the National Informatics Centre (NIC)”.

What is the MTSI?

• According to the report, the Mother Tongue Survey of India is a project that “surveys the mother tongues, which are returned consistently across two and more Census decades”. It also documents the linguistic features of the selected languages.
• The report states that the NIC and the National Film Development Corporation (NFDC) will be documenting and preserving the linguistic data of the surveyed mother tongues in audio-video files. Video-graphed speech data of Mother Tongues will also be uploaded on the NIC survey for archiving purposes.

How many “mother tongues” does India have, and what is spoken the most?

• As per an analysis of 2011 linguistic census data in 2018, more than 19,500 languages or dialects are spoken in India as mother tongues, PTI had reported earlier.
• The category “mother tongue” is a designation provided by the respondent, but it need not be identical with the actual linguistic medium. After subjecting the 19,569 returns to linguistic scrutiny, edit and rationalisation, they were grouped into 121 mother tongues, the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India, had earlier said.
• According to the 2011 linguistic census, Hindi is the most widely spoken mother tongue, with 52.8 crore people or 43.6 per cent of the population declaring it as the mother tongue. The next highest is Bengali, mother tongue for 9.7 crore individuals, and accounting for 8 per cent of the population.

Where does the mother tongue feature in the education of children?

• The new National Curriculum Framework (NCF) for the foundational stages of education, launched by Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan last month, has recommended that mother tongue should be the primary medium of instruction in schools for children up to eight years of age.

2. THE CENTRE CONSTITUTES 22ND LAW COMMISSION

THE CONTEXT: The Centre recently constituted the Law Commission of India with Justice (retd) Rituraj Awasthi, former Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, at its head.

THE EXPLANATION:

About the 22nd Law Commission:

• The Commission headed by Justice Awasthi is the 22nd Law Commission of India. The tenure of the 21st Law Commission, which was headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice B S Chauhan, came to an end on August 31 2018.
• The 22nd Commission has been constituted two and a half years after it was approved by the Union Cabinet on February 19, 2020, just before the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. A petition had been moved in the Supreme Court subsequently against the delay in constituting the 22nd Commission.

VALUE ADDITION: 

ABOUT LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA

• The Law Commission of India is an independent body set up by a government to undertake research in law and review existing laws in India for making reforms therein and enacting new legislation.
• It performs this function on a reference made to it by the Central Government or suo-motu.
• The Law Commission of India falls under the Executive branch.
• It is an advisory body of the Ministry of Law and Justice.
• It has no mention in any Article of the Constitution of India and therefore, it is a non-constitutional and non-statutory body.
• Usually, each Law Commission is constituted for a term of three years and thus it is not a permanent body. It is formed on an ad hoc basis, that is, temporarily.

DO YOU KNOW?

• The first Law Commission of pre-Independence India was constituted in 1834.
• It was set up under the Charter Act of 1833 and under the chairmanship of Lord Macaulay who is also known for his recommendation of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. SHOULD THE AGE OF CONSENT BE CHANGED FOR ADOLESCENTS?

THE CONTEXT: Recently, the Karnataka High Court has asked the Law Commission to rethink the age of consent under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, or POCSO, Act 2012.

THE EXPLANATION:

• According to the court the aspect of consent by a girl of 16 years, but who is below 18 years, would have to be considered, if it is indeed an offence under the Indian Penal Code and/or the POCSO Act.

What are the terms of the POCSO Act?

• Under the POCSO Act, 2012, and under several provisions of the IPC, whoever commits a penetrative sexual assault on a child — anyone below 18 years of age — can be “imprisoned for a term which is not less than seven years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to [a] fine.”
• Even if the girl is 16 years old, she is considered a “child” under the POCSO Act and hence her consent does not matter, and any sexual intercourse is treated as rape, thus opening it up to stringent punishment. There have been several instances in the past few years when the courts have quashed criminal proceedings of rape and kidnapping, after being convinced that the law was being misused to suit one or the other party.
• Often, the offender had been booked under Section 366 of the IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

About POCSO ACT:

• The POCSO Act was enacted in 2012 to provide a robust legal framework for the protection of children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography while safeguarding the interests of children at every stage of the judicial process.
• To make the punishment for child abuse has been made more stringent, the government has notified the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Rules, 2020 which enables the implementation of recent amendments to the Act.

Some features of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Rules, 2020:

• Mandatory police verification: The new rules include the provision of mandatory police verification of staff in schools and care homes, procedures to report sexual abuse material (pornography), imparting age-appropriate child rights education among others.
• Reporting to Special Juvenile Police Unit: For a crackdown on child pornography, any person who has received any pornographic material involving a child or any information regarding such pornographic material shall report the contents to the Special Juvenile Police Unit (SJPU) or police, or the cybercrime portal.
• Child protection policy: Under the rules, the State Governments have been asked to formulate a child protection policy based on the principle of zero-tolerance to violence against children, which shall be adopted by all institutions, organizations, or any other agency working with or coming in contact with children.

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

4. INDIA’S G20 PRESIDENCY

THE CONTEXT: Recently, Prime Minister unveiled the logo, theme and website of India’s G20 presidency. The logo bears a lotus and the message of ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam — One Earth, One Family, One Future’.

THE EXPLANATION:

• “While unveiling the logo he said, “The world is going through the after-effects of a disruptive once-in-a-century pandemic, conflicts and lot of economic uncertainty. The symbol of the lotus in the G20 logo is a representation of hope in these times. No matter how adverse the circumstances, the lotus still blooms.
• India will assume the presidency of the powerful G20 grouping from the current chair, Indonesia, on December 1, and hold the post for a year. The G20 Leaders’ Summit at the level of Heads of State/Government is scheduled to be held on September 9 and 10, 2023 in New Delhi.

ABOUT G20:

• The G20 was formed in 1999 in the backdrop of the financial crisis of the late 1990s that hit East Asia and Southeast Asia in particular. Its aim was to secure global financial stability by involving middle-income countries.
• Its prominent members are Australia, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the UK, the US, and the EU. Spain is invited as a permanent guest.
• The presidency of the G20 rotates every year among members, and the country holding the presidency, together with the previous and next presidency-holder, forms the ‘Troika’ to ensure continuity of the G20 agenda.
• During India’s presidency, India, Indonesia and Brazil will form the troika. “This would be the first time when the troika would consist of three developing countries and emerging economies”.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE GROUPING:

• “G20 is the premier forum for international economic cooperation representing around 85 per cent of the global GDP, over 75 per cent of the global trade, and about two-thirds of the world population.
• During the course of its G20 Presidency, India will be holding about 200 meetings in 32 different sectors in multiple locations across India. The G20 Summit to be held next year, would be one of the highest profile international gatherings to be hosted by India.

ENVIRONMENT, ECOLOGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

5. WHY CENTRE HAS RESTRICTED USE OF AN HERBICIDE IN DEMAND AMONG FARMERS

THE CONTEXT: Recently the Union Agriculture Ministry has restricted the use of glyphosate, a widely used herbicide. Also, there is a plea seeking a ban on all herbicide-tolerant crops, including transgenic hybrid mustard and cotton.

THE EXPLANATION:

What is glyphosate?

• It is an herbicide used to kill weeds — undesirable plants that compete with crops for nutrients, water and sunlight. Since weeds basically grow at the expense of crops, farmers remove them manually or spray herbicides.
• Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum herbicide that can control a wide range of weeds, whether broadleaf or grassy. It is also non-selective, killing most plants. When applied to their leaves, it inhibits the production of a protein ‘5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS)’. This enzyme, produced only by plants and microorganisms, synthesises aromatic amino acids that are necessary for their growth.

Use in India

• There are nine glyphosate-based formulations containing different concentrations of the chemical registered for use under the Insecticides Act, 1968 These are approved largely for weed control in tea gardens and non-crop areas such as railway tracks or playgrounds.
• Farmers also apply glyphosate on irrigation channels and bunds to clear these of weeds, making it easier for water to flow and to walk through them. Weeds growing on bunds are, moreover, hosts for fungi, such as those causing sheath blight disease in rice.
• In general, though, the scope for glyphosate use is limited for the very reason that it is non-selective. Designed to kill all plants coming into contact with it, the chemical cannot ordinarily distinguish between crop and weed. Hence, it can be used in tea or rubber plantations, but not in fields where the crops and weeds are at almost the same level.

Why has this been done?

• The scope for glyphosate is already restricted in normal agricultural crops by virtue of it being a non-selective herbicide. Glyphosate application has increased only with the advent of genetic modification (GM) or transgenic technology.
• In this case, it has involved incorporating a ‘cp4-epsps’ gene, isolated from a soil bacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens, into crop plants such as cotton, maize and soya bean. This alien gene codes for a protein that does not allow glyphosate to bind with the EPSPS enzyme. The said GM crop can, therefore, “tolerate” the spraying of the herbicide, which then kills only the weeds.
• In 2019 alone, some 81.5 million hectares were planted worldwide with herbicide-tolerant (HT) GM crops. The global glyphosate market is annually worth $9.3 billion, with over 45 per cent of use on account of GM crops.

How valid are the health concerns over glyphosate?

• The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), in March 2015, classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans”. But this was based on evidence for cancer in experimental animals from “pure” glyphosate, as opposed to that in humans from real-world exposures through diluted formulations (which is how the chemical is actually sold and used).
• The US Environmental Protection Agency, on the other hand, has held that there are “no risks of concern to human health from current uses of glyphosate” and “no evidence” of it causing cancer. Its findings are based on “a significantly more extensive and relevant dataset.

PRELIMS PRACTICE QUESTION

QUESTION OF THE DAY

Q. Consider the following statements about Garuda exercise:

1. It is air exercise between Air Forces of India and U.K.
2. The 2022 year edition of exercise took place in Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

a) 1 only

b) 2 only

c) Both 1 and 2

d) Neither 1 nor 2

Answer: B

Explanation:

Air Exercise Garuda-VII:

• Between Indian and French air forces.
• In Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
• LCA Tejas and LCH Prachand participated for first time in any international exercise.

THE CONTEXT: After recent months of back and forth attempting to negotiate a better trade agreement for India to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the Indian government decided not to join the trade forum and be excluded from what has been seen as one of the biggest plurilateral free-trade partnerships in the world.

India had been a part of negotiations for almost nine years till it pulled out in November 2019, stating that inadequate safeguards and lowering of customs duties will adversely impact its manufacturing, agriculture and dairy sectors.

However, by staying out, India has blocked itself from a trade bloc that represents 30% of the global economy and world population, touching over 2.2 billion people.

Further, as the summary of the final agreement shows that the pact does cover and attempt to address some issues that India had flagged, including rules of origin, trade in services, movement of persons. Therefore, this makes the case of India to review its decision and look RCEP through the lens of economic realism.

REASONS FOR INDIA’S NOT SIGNING RCEP

India’s withdrawals from RCEP may be attributed to its trade and technical concerns:

TRADE CONCERNS

INDIA’S BILATERAL TRADE-DEFICIT WITH RCEP COUNTRIES

India has already a bilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with South Korea, ASEAN countries and Japan which are the part of RCEP. Though trade has increased the post-Free Trade Agreement with these countries, imports have risen faster than exports from India.

According to a paper published by NITI Aayog, India has a bilateral trade deficit with most of the member countries of RCEP.

TRADE & STRATEGIC CONCERNS WITH CHINA

India has already signed FTA with all the countries of RCEP except China. Trade data suggests that India’s deficit with China, without any trade pact with it, is higher than that of the remaining RCEP constituents put together.

India already has a massive trade deficit with China and a lower custom duty-invoked by this trade agreement, would have made its commodity markets extremely vulnerable to an influx of Chinese goods. This trade deficit is the primary concern for India, as after signing RCEP cheaper products from China would have flooded the Indian market.

Further, from a geopolitical perspective, RCEP is China-led or is intended to expand China’s influence in Asia.

PROTECTION OF DOMESTIC INDUSTRY

India’s withdrawal from RCEP is due to its possible negative effects on small and medium scale farmers, traders and industries, which are already experiencing a chronic slowdown. India had also reportedly expressed apprehensions on lowering and eliminating tariffs on several products like dairy, steel etc. For instance, the dairy industry is expected to face stiff competition from Australia and New Zealand. Currently, India’s average bound tariff for dairy products is on average 35%.The RCEP binds countries to reduce that current level of tariffs to zero within the next 15 years.

TECHNICAL CONCERNS

UNAVAILABILITY OF THE MOST FAVORED NATION (MFN) CLAUSE

One key issue for India was the unavailability of the Most Favored Nation (MFN) clause that would have made India to give the same treatment to RCEP nations that it gave to others.

NON-ACCEPTANCE OF AUTO-TRIGGER MECHANISM

To deal with the imminent rise in imports, India had been seeking an auto-trigger mechanism.Auto-trigger Mechanism would have allowed India to raise tariffs on products in instances where imports cross a certain threshold. However, other countries in the RCEP were against this proposal.

LACK OF CONSENSUS ON RULES OF ORIGIN

India was concerned about a “possible circumvention” of rules of origin. Rules of origin are the criteria used to determine the national source of a product. Current provisions in the deal reportedly do not prevent countries from routing, through other countries, products on which India would maintain higher tariffs.

WHY INDIA SHOULD HAVE SIGNED RCEP?

More than the technical reasons, it is the concerns of cheaper inflows of imported goods from RCEP countries and trade deficit with them that may have given reasons to India for not signing this agreement. However,

• If India is not part of trade pacts with major countries, and the WTO process is in trouble, it will quite quickly run out of countries to trade with. Sure, India can continue to export to these countries, but it will suffer a disadvantage since, with the pact-countries, there will be no/low import duties on most goods traded while this will not hold for India.
• What makes an exports push all the more critical is that India’s high GDP growth in the past has been directly related to exports growth, not that of local consumption. In the boom years of 2003-08, JP Morgan chief India economist Sajjid Chinoy points out, India’s real exports growth averaged 17.8% annually while (public and private) consumption grew just 7.2%; a similar point has also been made by former chief economic advisor Arvind Subramanian.

Analysis by Pravin Krishna of Johns Hopkins University, for the period 2007 to 2018, shows that India’s trade deficit—as a share of its total trade deficit—with the ASEAN fell from 9.9% to 6.6%. For all bilateral agreements that India has, such as with Japan, Korea, etc, this fell from 12.6% to 7.5%. Interestingly, the sharpest deterioration in India’s deficit is with China, a country with which it has no FTA.

INDIA’S POOR COMPETITIVENESS IS THE REAL ISSUE:

• The real issue that comes out is that of India’s poor competitiveness, and that has little to do with FTAs. To understand this better, let’s keep India out of the equation, just look at the overall exports of various countries.
• In the last 20 years (see graphic), India’s exports grew 9 times while those of China rose 13 times—on a base that is 5.5 times India’s—and Vietnam’s rose 23 times; as a result, from a mere 32% of India’s in 1999, Vietnam’s exports are 81.5% of India’s today. In other words, whether or not we sign a trade pact with these countries, chances are their exports will grow faster than India’s; the fact that their exports are growing faster than ours means they are more competitive.
• The same result, of lack of competitiveness, as it happens, is visible from India’s overall exports. From 16.8% of GDP in FY12, India’s exports fell to 10.9% in FY20; and while imports fell from 26.8% to 16.5%, imports are significantly higher than exports.
• Indeed, the production linked incentive (PLI) scheme that the government has finalised for mobile phones—and plans to do for 10 other sectors soon—is itself recognition of this reality since the PLI offered are meant to offset a part of the disadvantage of producing in India. One of the studies on the disadvantage in the case of mobile phones put this at 9.4-12.5% versus manufacturing in Vietnam; the cost of electricity (based on the amount used for production) added one per cent to the cost of production of a phone in India, expensive bank loans added 1.5-2% to the costs, logistics 0.5%, land one per cent, etc.

REASONS FOR INDIA TO REVIEW

GLOBAL ECONOMIC STAGNATION DUE TO COVID-19

With global trade and the economy facing a steep decline due to Covid-19 pandemic, RCEP can serve as a bulwark in containing the free fall of the global economy and re-energising economic activity.Further, the RCEP presents a unique opportunity to support India’s economic recovery, inclusive development and job creation even as it helps strengthen regional supply chains.

NEED FOR ECONOMIC REALISM

India should deter seeing RCEP only from the Chinese perspective.India should acknowledge that the trade bloc represents 30% of the global economy and world population, touching over 2.2 billion people, and staying out of RCEP may result in suboptimal economic growth without leveraging Asia-Pacific demand.

In this regard, India can draw inspiration from Japan & Australia, as they chose to bury their geopolitical differences with China to prioritise what they collectively see as a mutually beneficial trading compact.

STRATEGIC NEED

It is not just because gains from trade are significant, but the RCEP’s membership is a prerequisite to having a say in shaping RCEP’s rules. This is necessary to safeguard India’s interests and the interests of several countries that are too small to stand up to the largest member, China. Moreover, staying out of RCEP may also affect India’s Act East policy.

CONCLUSION: According to some experts, one of the ways India can offset the trade and strategic loss due to signing out of this RCEP is by signing FTA with both the USA and the EU. While it is theoretically possible India’s exports can grow faster should there be an FTA with both the US and EU—even so, China and Vietnam’s higher competitiveness is an issue—it is by no means a given that such an FTA can be signed quickly. Indeed, for decades, India has resisted opening up sectors that the US and EU have been interested in. That something like the import duties on Harley Davidson motorcycles was allowed to become a friction point between India and the US despite no serious manufacture of these motorcycles in India indicates just how inflexible India has been; imagine its ability to open up sectors or reduce duties in sectors where there are a large number of local producers who will be hit.

Given the economic and market power India wields, the RCEP members have left the door open for India. It would be in India’s interest to dispassionately review its position on RCEP and carry out structural reforms that will help India to mitigate some of the repercussions arising from the RCEP.