05-01-2023 (Important News Clippings)
To Download Click Here.
Date:05-01-23
How Free Now?
SC did well to warn against further restrictions on free speech. But misuse of IPC provisions needs checking too
TOI Editorials
Additionally, the 4-1 ruling also reiterated that rights under Articles 19(1) (free speech) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) can be enforced against private entities and the state is bound to protect these rights, even when they are infringed by non-state actors. This is an important reminder from SC. Many ordinary citizens find their ways of life, privacy, choices and liberties constrained by dominant groups. It is a cue for officers of the state to proceed against those vigilantes, many of whom are politicians, who muzzle others’ rights.
The majority verdict may have disappointed those hoping that ministers making outrageous, often hurtful, statements would be sanctioned. But SC was clear that individual statements of ministers were inadequate to invoke collective responsibility of cabinet, terming it impractical too when a PM or a CM is politically weak and/or head coalitions. Moreover, violation of constitutional rights and invoking constitutional tort for securing damages happens only when the statement resulted in harm or losses to the complainant.
Despite this conclusion, which is quite logical too, both the majority and the minority verdicts – the latter by Justice BV Nagarathna – uphold free speech emphatically. However, what judicial pronouncements aren’t able to fix is misuse of IPC provisions drawing their constitutionality from Article 19(2)’s reasonable restrictions. Anyone claiming that their sentiment has been hurt – reasons can be religion, caste, or even criticism of a politician or an officeholder – can lodge police complaints. They and cops should heed the majority judgment’s sagacious words: “The emphasis even in the Preamble on ‘fraternity’ is an indication that survival of all fundamental rights and survival of democracy itself depends upon mutual respect, accommodation and willingness to coexist in peace and tranquillity on the part of citizens. ”
We Can’t Talk Green, Walk Degradation
Rethink the draft Regional Plan 2041
ET Editorials
The lack of protection given to the Aravalli Range in the draft Regional Plan 2041 prepared by the National Capital Region (NCR) Planning Board under the urban development ministry is worrisome. The exclusion of the Aravallis from areas demarcated as ‘natural zones’ or areas earmarkedfor conservation will give a free run to construction and mining in the range. This will have adverse implications for the NCR. GoI should reconsider this lax approach.
The 550 km-long Aravalli range is a fragile biodiversityrich ecosystem. It is the NCR’s only water and air recharge zone. The range acts as a natural barrier against the encroachment of the Thar desert, a protection against sandstorms, and sustains the region’s water levels. Their continued degradation also contributes to the NCR’s increased air pollution, water stress from falling water levels, and desertification. Rather than approve a masterplan that gives a free run to construction and mining that will exacerbate air pollution, water stress and the destruction of species, the NCR Planning Board should revisit its plan. It must engage with experts and all stakeholders to develop one that is sustainable. It makes no sense to cut off one’s nose to spite one’s face.
At COP15 to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Montreal, India and 190-odd countries agreed to set targets to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. The draft Regional Plan 2041 certainly goes against this agreement. India must not be seen as promising something and doing something else. Most importantly, to ignore conservationary measures is to hurt ourselves. India’s domestic systems must be rigorous to ensure robust ecosystem protection. Policymakers must recognise that environmental protection is not inimical to economic growth and development. Rather, the degradation of the environment undermines growth and development as it undermines ecosystem services critical to sustaining life, such as ensuring clean air and maintaining water systems. Nature is an asset with economic value. Ergo, it must be protected.
The values of local self-governance
Debates on federalism should include larger discussions on how power should be divided and shared between governments at the Union, State, and local level
Mathew Idiculla is a legal consultant and a visiting faculty at Azim Premji University, Bengaluru
In December 1992, Parliament passed the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments, which instituted panchayats and municipalities, respectively. These amendments mandated that State governments constitute panchayats (at the village, block and district levels) and municipalities (in the form of municipal corporations, municipal councils and nagar panchayats) in every region. They sought to institute a third-tier of governance in the federal framework through the devolution of functions, funds, and functionaries to local governments.
Since local governments seldom derive their authority directly from the Constitution, India’s constitutional reforms for decentralisation are exceptional. But despite these reforms, municipal governments are often seen to be ineffective in addressing even the most basic needs of citizens, such as reliable water supply and walkable footpaths. Urban residents tend to blame “corrupt” local politicians for these civic woes.
However, as we celebrate the 30th anniversary of these reforms, it is important to ask fundamental questions: Why should local governments be empowered? Why are they weak despite constitutional reforms? How can the idea of local self-governance be revived?
The normative basis of local self-governance
Understanding the normative basis of local self-governance is important since this also informs the institutional form local governments take. Local self-governance is linked to the idea of subsidiarity and is typically grounded on two broad arguments. First, it provides for efficient provision of public goods since governments with smaller jurisdictions can provide services as per the preferences of their residents. Second, it promotes deeper democracy since governments that are closer to the people allow citizens to engage with public affairs more easily.
India’s decentralisation agenda is also arguably driven by these values. The 73rd and 74th amendments require States to vest panchayats and municipalities with the authority “to enable them to function as institutions of self-government”, including the powers to prepare and implement plans and schemes for economic development and social justice. They also mandate the regular conduct of local elections, provide for the reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes, Schedules Tribes and women in local councils, and institute participative forums like gram sabhas in panchayats and ward committees in municipal corporations. Hence, the core values that the amendments sought to entrench are that of deepening local democracy and devolving functions for meeting the ends of economic development and social justice. Debates on the role and responsibilities of local governments should be foregrounded by these normative values which have found expression, at least in some regard, in the Constitution.
Despite the constitutional promise of local self-governance, local governments, especially municipalities, operate with limited autonomy and authority. Their frailty may be attributed to the inherent limitations of the 74th amendment and the failure of State governments and courts to implement and interpret the amendment in letter and spirit. Limitations include the discretion given to the States regarding devolution of powers and levying of local taxes. State governments are reluctant to implement the 74th amendment as cities are economic powerhouses and controlling urban land is important for financing State governments and political parties.
The courts have also mostly interpreted the 74th amendment narrowly, allowing State governments to retain their control over cities. In this context, the Patna High Court’s recent order declaring some provisions of the Bihar Municipal (Amendment) Act, 2021 as unconstitutional is path-breaking. The 2021 amendment had transferred the powers of appointment of Grade C and D employees of municipalities from the Empowered Standing Committee of the municipality to the State government-controlled Directorate of Municipal Administration. The court held that these provisions violate the 74th Amendment since the recentralization of power and the weakening of self-governance “are incompatible with the idea, intent and design of the constitutional amendment”.
Local governments and federalism
This judgment is unprecedented since it tested State municipal laws against the letter and spirit of the 74th Amendment and can potentially reset the position of local governments in India’s federal framework. As India is undergoing a centralising shift in its politics, economy, and culture, there’s also been a renewed assertion of federalism. However, this assertion of State rights is hardly articulated as value-based normative claims. If we unpack the intellectual arguments for federalism, many of them are also applicable for local self-governance. Hence, debates on federalism should include larger discussions on how power should be divided and shared between governments at the Union, State, and local level since local governments are, normatively and structurally, an integral part of the federal framework of the Constitution.
शब्दों की परिभाषा बदलने से फैसलों पर भ्रम होता है
संपादकीय
संविधान के अनुच्छेद 124 में राष्ट्रपति द्वारा सीजेआई से सलाह (कंसल्टेशन) लेकर जजों की नियुक्ति करने का प्रावधान है। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने सन् 1981 में प्रथम जजेस (नियुक्ति में वरीयता किसकी ? सरकार की या सीजेआई की) केस में कहा था कि सलाह यानी सहमति (कोन्करेंस) नहीं है। लेकिन सन् 1993 में द्वितीय जजेस केस में नौ सदस्यीय संविधान पीठ ने कहा ‘यहां इस शब्द का मतलब सहमति है यानी सरकार को नियुक्ति करने में सीजेआई (कॉलेजियम जिसे इसी फैसले से अस्तित्व मिला) की सहमति अनिवार्य होगी। तब से आज इस कोर्ट ने इस मुद्दे पर सलाह यानी सहमति माना, हालांकि संविधान सभा में इस राय को (सलाह की जगह सहमति शब्द रखा जाए) खारिज कर दिया था। अब एक पांच सदस्यीय पीठ ने नोटबंदी के मामले में आरबीआई एक्ट की धारा 26 (ब) में प्रयुक्त शब्द संस्तुति (रिकमेन्डेशन) की नई परिभाषा दी। इस बेंच के अनुसार संस्तुति यानी सलाहकारी प्रक्रिया (या सलाह) बताया है। प्रश्न है जब जजेस की नियुक्ति की शक्तियों की बात होती है। तो कैसे सलाह बाध्यकारी हो जाती है पर उसी कानून में प्रयुक्त ‘संस्तुति’ सरीखे शब्द को उसी कोर्ट की एक छोटी संविधान पीठ सरकार के लिए बाध्यकारी नहीं मानती और एक नई परिभाषा देती है? इससे भी ज्यादा भ्रम तब पैदा होता है जब उसी बेंच की एक जज, जो बहुमत की राय से इत्तेफाक नहीं रखतीं, ने पूरी नोटबंदी की प्रक्रिया महज एक दिन में पूरा करना गलत माना है। बहुमत फैसला कहता है कि नोटबंदी के निर्णय पर पहुंचने के पहले छह माह आरबीआई से विमर्श चला। शब्दों के मायने और उससे उपजे सत्य इतने विरोधाभासी कैसे हो सकते हैं?
Date:05-01-23
नैनो उर्वरकों के फायदे
संपादकीय
महत्त्वपूर्ण बात यह है कि देश में अब तक वाणिज्यिक रूप से इस्तेमाल किए जा रहे हाई-टेक नैनो उर्वरक न केवल सामान्य उर्वरकों की तुलना में काफी सस्ते और प्रभावी हैं बल्कि उनके अलावा भी कई लाभ हैं। उनका पोषण इस्तेमाल अधिक किफायती होता है और वे मिट्टी की उर्वरता में सुधार करके उपज और फसल गुणवत्ता में सुधार कर सकते हैं। उदाहरण के लिए खेतों में परीक्षण के दौरान नैनो यूरिया को 80 फीसदी तक किफायती पाया गया जो पारंपरिक यूरिया की तुलना में दोगुना है। अनुमान है कि इसके इस्तेमाल से उपज में तीन से 16 फीसदी का इजाफा हुआ यानी किसानों को प्रति एकड़ करीब 2,400 रुपये से 5,700 रुपये का फायदा हुआ। नैनो यूरिया की एक बोतल में 500 मिलीलीटर तरल उर्वरक होता है और इसकी कीमत 240 रुपये है। यह कीमत भारी सब्सिडी पर मिलने वाले यूरिया के 45 किलो के बैग की तुलना में काफी कम है जबकि दोनों में समान मात्रा में नाइट्रोजन है। नैनो-डीएपी की कीमत 600 रुपये प्रति बोतल रहेगी जो सामान्य डीएपी के 50 किलो के बैग के बराबर होगी। इस 50 किलो के बैग के लिए किसानों को 1,350 रुपये चुकाने होते हैं वह भी 2,000 रुपये से अधिक की भारी सब्सिडी के बाद। इसके अलावा नैनो उर्वरक तरल स्वरूप में होने के कारण छोटी बोतलों में आ जाते हैं जिन्हें लाना-ले जाना आसान होता है। इससे किसानों को भारी भरकम बोरियों की ढुलाई में लगने वाली लागत से बचाव होता है। ऐसे में ये उर्वरक फसल उत्पादन की लागत कम करने में मदद करेंगे और खेती का मुनाफा बढ़ाएंगे।
नैनो उर्वरकों का एक और लाभ जिसकी ज्यादा चर्चा नहीं होती है वह यह है कि पारंपरिक उर्वरकों की तुलना में ये पर्यावरण को बहुत कम हानि पहुंचाते हैं। पारंपरिक उर्वरक हवा, मिट्टी और पानी तीनों को प्रदूषित करते हैं। चूंकि ये विषाक्त नहीं होते और स्वास्थ्य एवं प्राकृतिक जैव विविधता को नुकसान नहीं पहुंचाते इसलिए ये उर्वरक कृषि क्षेत्र के ग्रीनहाउस उत्सर्जन में भी काफी कमी लाते हैं। पारंपरिक उर्वरकों की तुलना में नैनो उर्वरकों के इन तमाम सकारात्मक पहलुओं को देखते हुए कहा जा सकता है कि इनको बढ़ावा देने की आवश्यकता है। इनके लाभ इतने अधिक हैं कि ये सभी अंशधारकों के लिए लाभदायक साबित होंगे। खासतौर पर किसानों के लिए जिन्हें कच्चे माल में बचत होगी और सरकार को भी उर्वरकों पर कम सब्सिडी का बोझ उठाना होगा।
