✍✍Declaring the right to health a fundamental right
The pandemic has exposed the deep vulnerabilities of India’s healthcare system. Much of this is blamed on India’s low expenditure on public health –1.29% of the GDP (in 2019-20), lower than most other countries. Another critical reason for the weak public health in India is the absence of a statutory framework that guarantees a fundamental right to health There is a need to make the right to health a fundamental right – and implement it within the framework of legal devices and human rights principles of solidarity, proportionality, and transparency which will help India address the challenges posed by COVID19. Implementing the right to health within India’s framework of co-operative federalism will build capacities where they are most needed – at the grassroots.
The pandemic has exposed the deep vulnerabilities of India’s healthcare system. Much of this is blamed on India’s low expenditure on public health –1.29% of the GDP (in 2019-20), lower than most other countries. Another critical reason for the weak public health in India is the absence of a statutory framework that guarantees a fundamental right to health There is a need to make the right to health a fundamental right – and implement it within the framework of legal devices and human rights principles of solidarity, proportionality, and transparency which will help India address the challenges posed by COVID19. Implementing the right to health within India’s framework of co-operative federalism will build capacities where they are most needed – at the grassroots.
✍✍Constitution and the Right to Health
The Constitution of India does not expressly guarantee a fundamental right to health. However, there are multiple references in the Constitution to public health and on the role of the State in the provision of healthcare to citizens.
The Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the India Constitution provide a basis for the right to health. Article 39 (E) directs the State to secure health of workers, Article 42 directs the State to just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief, Article 47 casts a duty on the State to raise the nutrition levels and standard of living of people and to improve public health. Moreover, the Constitution does not only oblige the State to enhance public health, it also endows the Panchayats and Municipalities to strengthen public health under Article 243G (read with 11th Schedule, Entry 23).
Given no explicit recognition of the right to health or healthcare under the Constitution, the Supreme Court of India in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v Union of India & Ors interpreted the right to health under Article 21 which guarantees the right to life. In State of Punjab & Ors v Mohinder Singh Chawla the apex court reaffirmed that the right to health is fundamental to the right to life and should be put on record that the government had a constitutional obligation to provide health services. In State of Punjab & Ors v Ram Lubhaya Bagga, the court went on to endorse the State’s responsibility to maintain health services.
In September 2019, a High-Level Group on the health sector constituted under the 15th Finance Commission had recommended that the right to health be declared a fundamental right. It also put forward a recommendation to shift the subject of health from the State List to the Concurrent List. The recommendation to declare the right to health a fundamental right, if implemented, will strengthen people’s access. However, the latter recommendation to shift health to the Concurrent List will lead to a constitutional conundrum on whether the centralisation of public health will be helpful in the context of Indian cooperative federalism. At present, the subject of “public health and sanitation; hospitals and dispensaries” falls under the State List of the 7th Schedule of the Constitution of India – which means that state governments enjoy constitutional directives to adopt, enact and enforce public health regulations.
The recommendation to declare the right to health a fundamental right, if implemented, will strengthen people’s access. However, the latter recommendation to shift health to the Concurrent List will lead to a constitutional conundrum on whether the centralisation of public health will be helpful in the context of Indian cooperative federalism
A 2019 NITI Aayog report highlighted that states in India had unequal public health systems. This imbalance was primarily due to restricted technical expertise and fiscal constraints. While fiscal dependence of states on the centre continues to be a major challenge, if the subject of health was moved to the Concurrent List, it would lead to excessive bureaucracy, red tape and institutional constraints.
Even as the policy decision of states would continue to remain subjective to the political orientation of the federal executive, this centralisation would rip states of their constitutional rights. Furthermore, a uniform strategy would not provide the specialised attention that states across India need.
On a crucial subject like health, there must be coordination between the centre and states without impeding cooperative federalism – an essential element of the Indian Constitution. The joint response to COVID19 has demonstrated the need for strong capacities at the district and local levels to contain the spread of the pandemic.
The Constitution of India does not expressly guarantee a fundamental right to health. However, there are multiple references in the Constitution to public health and on the role of the State in the provision of healthcare to citizens.
The Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the India Constitution provide a basis for the right to health. Article 39 (E) directs the State to secure health of workers, Article 42 directs the State to just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief, Article 47 casts a duty on the State to raise the nutrition levels and standard of living of people and to improve public health. Moreover, the Constitution does not only oblige the State to enhance public health, it also endows the Panchayats and Municipalities to strengthen public health under Article 243G (read with 11th Schedule, Entry 23).
Given no explicit recognition of the right to health or healthcare under the Constitution, the Supreme Court of India in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v Union of India & Ors interpreted the right to health under Article 21 which guarantees the right to life. In State of Punjab & Ors v Mohinder Singh Chawla the apex court reaffirmed that the right to health is fundamental to the right to life and should be put on record that the government had a constitutional obligation to provide health services. In State of Punjab & Ors v Ram Lubhaya Bagga, the court went on to endorse the State’s responsibility to maintain health services.
In September 2019, a High-Level Group on the health sector constituted under the 15th Finance Commission had recommended that the right to health be declared a fundamental right. It also put forward a recommendation to shift the subject of health from the State List to the Concurrent List. The recommendation to declare the right to health a fundamental right, if implemented, will strengthen people’s access. However, the latter recommendation to shift health to the Concurrent List will lead to a constitutional conundrum on whether the centralisation of public health will be helpful in the context of Indian cooperative federalism. At present, the subject of “public health and sanitation; hospitals and dispensaries” falls under the State List of the 7th Schedule of the Constitution of India – which means that state governments enjoy constitutional directives to adopt, enact and enforce public health regulations.
The recommendation to declare the right to health a fundamental right, if implemented, will strengthen people’s access. However, the latter recommendation to shift health to the Concurrent List will lead to a constitutional conundrum on whether the centralisation of public health will be helpful in the context of Indian cooperative federalism
A 2019 NITI Aayog report highlighted that states in India had unequal public health systems. This imbalance was primarily due to restricted technical expertise and fiscal constraints. While fiscal dependence of states on the centre continues to be a major challenge, if the subject of health was moved to the Concurrent List, it would lead to excessive bureaucracy, red tape and institutional constraints.
Even as the policy decision of states would continue to remain subjective to the political orientation of the federal executive, this centralisation would rip states of their constitutional rights. Furthermore, a uniform strategy would not provide the specialised attention that states across India need.
On a crucial subject like health, there must be coordination between the centre and states without impeding cooperative federalism – an essential element of the Indian Constitution. The joint response to COVID19 has demonstrated the need for strong capacities at the district and local levels to contain the spread of the pandemic.
Lessons from the response also show that while smooth coordination between states and the centre is imperative, health needs to continue to be in the State List. Decentralisation of power and funds to states for boosting their respective public health systems is therefore imperative.
For example, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, though they struggled in the beginning, were able to control the Japanese Encephalitis outbreak in 2019. Even in the ongoing pandemic, Maharashtra and Delhi invoked The Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 before the central government invoked the National Disaster Management Act, 2005 on March 23.
Through the Directive Principles of State Policy, the Constitution has made a forceful appeal to the State to provide a decent standard of living. Several legal precedents have dictated that the state is responsible for citizens’ healthcare. India’s commitment to international legal treaties and conventions also binds it, as a state party, to enhance and provide adequate public services and a minimum standard of universal health care. Existing constitutional guarantees, legal precedents and global commitments form a solid basis for a fundamental right to health in India. A legislatively guaranteed right will make access to health legally binding and ensure accountability. A constitutional amendment on the lines of the 93rd Amendment to the Constitution which provided a constitutional sanction to the right to education, should be adopted for providing adequate healthcare in India.
For example, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, though they struggled in the beginning, were able to control the Japanese Encephalitis outbreak in 2019. Even in the ongoing pandemic, Maharashtra and Delhi invoked The Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 before the central government invoked the National Disaster Management Act, 2005 on March 23.
Through the Directive Principles of State Policy, the Constitution has made a forceful appeal to the State to provide a decent standard of living. Several legal precedents have dictated that the state is responsible for citizens’ healthcare. India’s commitment to international legal treaties and conventions also binds it, as a state party, to enhance and provide adequate public services and a minimum standard of universal health care. Existing constitutional guarantees, legal precedents and global commitments form a solid basis for a fundamental right to health in India. A legislatively guaranteed right will make access to health legally binding and ensure accountability. A constitutional amendment on the lines of the 93rd Amendment to the Constitution which provided a constitutional sanction to the right to education, should be adopted for providing adequate healthcare in India.
✍✍Principles to be adopted
In addition to statutory recognition, the right to health in India will need to be implemented within the framework of principles of solidarity, proportionality, and transparency that are central to international human rights and health law, as proposed by Professor of Health Law Katharina Ó Cathoir. These three principles are even more crucial in addressing the present challenge posed by the COVID19.
In addition to statutory recognition, the right to health in India will need to be implemented within the framework of principles of solidarity, proportionality, and transparency that are central to international human rights and health law
The principle of solidarity is closely linked to the fundamentals of justice and equity. In the context of the right to health, solidarity can guarantee equal access to public health systems to all. In the current pandemic, India’s marginalised communities are disproportionately hurt due to the lack or minimal access to healthcare and other basic needs which have further deepened stark inequalities. The assertion of solidarity requires that the government and institutions treat people and protect their rights equally without any discrimination based on sex, caste, class, religion and language. At the national level, domestic solidarity would mandate state governments and institutions to look for standard solutions to shared challenges for combined interests.
In the legal context, the doctrine of proportionality is a tool to determine a correct balance between the restrictions imposed by the state as a corrective measure and the severity of the prohibited acts. The doctrine of proportionality help in determining the conditions for a limitation of constitutionally-protected rights. In the present time, the Government of India along the other countries has adopted far-reaching measures such as lockdown to control movement, mandatory institutional quarantine and criminalisation of those who do not comply with the guidelines. These actions have resulted in unprecedented restrictions on civil liberties and human rights. The government is certainly entitled to take certain decisions for the betterment of public health; however, these decisions should not be dehors the test of proportionality. Tough and hard decisions don’t necessarily lead to success; it is the systematic approach and respect for human rights along with the interest of the community at larger that is the way forward. For example, Japan, South Korea and Sweden, while respecting the civil rights of their citizens, took less restrictive measures to address the challenge posed by COVID19 and are successful.
The principle of transparency is critical for good governance and to ensure people’s trust in public administration. To effectively allow the scrutiny of decisions made by the government and of its maintained institutions, information should be available, accessible and disseminated among the population. The principle of transparency goes hand-in-hand with that of accountability and reliability. In the context of the right to health and healthcare, the practice of transparency will help in keeping the inflation in drugs and medical services under control, maintain the adequate functioning of public institutions and hold on to the trust of the people. Recent efforts to use big data analytics to track patients and trace contacts through applications like Aarogya Setu, need to align with the principle of personal data protection, and any use or dissemination should be with the prior consent of the citizens in a transparent manner. There have been multiple reports of data fudging of COVID19 cases in India, affecting people’s trust.
In addition to statutory recognition, the right to health in India will need to be implemented within the framework of principles of solidarity, proportionality, and transparency that are central to international human rights and health law, as proposed by Professor of Health Law Katharina Ó Cathoir. These three principles are even more crucial in addressing the present challenge posed by the COVID19.
In addition to statutory recognition, the right to health in India will need to be implemented within the framework of principles of solidarity, proportionality, and transparency that are central to international human rights and health law
The principle of solidarity is closely linked to the fundamentals of justice and equity. In the context of the right to health, solidarity can guarantee equal access to public health systems to all. In the current pandemic, India’s marginalised communities are disproportionately hurt due to the lack or minimal access to healthcare and other basic needs which have further deepened stark inequalities. The assertion of solidarity requires that the government and institutions treat people and protect their rights equally without any discrimination based on sex, caste, class, religion and language. At the national level, domestic solidarity would mandate state governments and institutions to look for standard solutions to shared challenges for combined interests.
In the legal context, the doctrine of proportionality is a tool to determine a correct balance between the restrictions imposed by the state as a corrective measure and the severity of the prohibited acts. The doctrine of proportionality help in determining the conditions for a limitation of constitutionally-protected rights. In the present time, the Government of India along the other countries has adopted far-reaching measures such as lockdown to control movement, mandatory institutional quarantine and criminalisation of those who do not comply with the guidelines. These actions have resulted in unprecedented restrictions on civil liberties and human rights. The government is certainly entitled to take certain decisions for the betterment of public health; however, these decisions should not be dehors the test of proportionality. Tough and hard decisions don’t necessarily lead to success; it is the systematic approach and respect for human rights along with the interest of the community at larger that is the way forward. For example, Japan, South Korea and Sweden, while respecting the civil rights of their citizens, took less restrictive measures to address the challenge posed by COVID19 and are successful.
The principle of transparency is critical for good governance and to ensure people’s trust in public administration. To effectively allow the scrutiny of decisions made by the government and of its maintained institutions, information should be available, accessible and disseminated among the population. The principle of transparency goes hand-in-hand with that of accountability and reliability. In the context of the right to health and healthcare, the practice of transparency will help in keeping the inflation in drugs and medical services under control, maintain the adequate functioning of public institutions and hold on to the trust of the people. Recent efforts to use big data analytics to track patients and trace contacts through applications like Aarogya Setu, need to align with the principle of personal data protection, and any use or dissemination should be with the prior consent of the citizens in a transparent manner. There have been multiple reports of data fudging of COVID19 cases in India, affecting people’s trust.
✍✍Parting note
It is time India declared the right to health a fundamental right. Strong health laws will help build societal resilience to future pandemics and public health emergencies. Emergency responses can’t come at the cost of neglect of human rights obligations.
It is critical then that the right to health be implemented, using the principles of transparency, proportionality and solidarity. The COVID19 experience has also demonstrated the importance of a decentralized/polycentric response – India’s co-operative federalism, therefore, must be strengthened.
It is time India declared the right to health a fundamental right. Strong health laws will help build societal resilience to future pandemics and public health emergencies. Emergency responses can’t come at the cost of neglect of human rights obligations.
It is critical then that the right to health be implemented, using the principles of transparency, proportionality and solidarity. The COVID19 experience has also demonstrated the importance of a decentralized/polycentric response – India’s co-operative federalism, therefore, must be strengthened.
Forwarded from DREAMS CORE IAS STUDY CHANNEL
Link :- @dreamscoreias_official
Now,,
Q. Is the channel( platform) useful/helpful for UPSC ( CSE) _ 2022/ 2023 batch aspirants ?
Now,,
Q. Is the channel( platform) useful/helpful for UPSC ( CSE) _ 2022/ 2023 batch aspirants ?
Forwarded from DREAMS CORE IAS STUDY CHANNEL
Share your answer and comments
Anonymous Quiz
36%
A. If Yes , then why ? , comments on I'd.
34%
B. If No , then why ? , comments on I'd.
15%
C. If average , then why ? , comments on I'd.
15%
D. Nill
✍✍Cryptocurrency
A cryptocurrency or crypto, is a virtual currency secured by cryptography. It is designed to work as a medium of exchange, where individual ownership records are stored in a computerised database.
The defining trait of a cryptocurrency is that they are not issued by the government agency of any country making them immune against any interference and manipulation from them.
✍✍Definition of Cryptocurrency
In simplistic terms, Cryptocurrency is a digitised asset spread through multiple computers in a shared network. The decentralised nature of this network shields them from any control from government regulatory bodies.
The term “cryptocurrency in itself is derived from the encryption techniques used to secure the network.
As per computer experts, any system that falls under the category of cryptocurrency must meet the following requirements.:
Absence of any centralised authority and is maintained through distributed networks
The system maintains records of cryptocurrency units and who owns them
The system decides whether new units can be created and in case it does, decided the origin and the ownership terms
Ownership of cryptocurrency units can be proved exclusively cryptographically.
The system allows transactions to be performed in which ownership of the cryptographic units is changed.
✍✍Types of Cryptocurrency
The first type of crypto currency was Bitcoin, which to this day remains the most-used, valuable and popular. Along with Bitcoin, other alternative cryptocurrencies with varying degrees of functions and specifications have been created. Some are iterations of bitcoin while others have been created from the ground up
Bitcoin was launched in 2009 by an individual or group known by the pseudonym “Satoshi Nakamoto.
As of March 2021, there were over 18.6 million bitcoins in circulation with a total market cap of around $927 billion.
The competing cryptocurrencies that were created as a result of Bitcoin’s success are known as altcoins. Some of the well known altcoins are as follows:
Litecoin
Peercoin
Namecoin
Ethereum
Cardana
Today, the aggregate value of all the cryptocurrencies in existence is around $1.5 trillion—Bitcoin currently represents more than 60% of the total value.3.
A cryptocurrency or crypto, is a virtual currency secured by cryptography. It is designed to work as a medium of exchange, where individual ownership records are stored in a computerised database.
The defining trait of a cryptocurrency is that they are not issued by the government agency of any country making them immune against any interference and manipulation from them.
✍✍Definition of Cryptocurrency
In simplistic terms, Cryptocurrency is a digitised asset spread through multiple computers in a shared network. The decentralised nature of this network shields them from any control from government regulatory bodies.
The term “cryptocurrency in itself is derived from the encryption techniques used to secure the network.
As per computer experts, any system that falls under the category of cryptocurrency must meet the following requirements.:
Absence of any centralised authority and is maintained through distributed networks
The system maintains records of cryptocurrency units and who owns them
The system decides whether new units can be created and in case it does, decided the origin and the ownership terms
Ownership of cryptocurrency units can be proved exclusively cryptographically.
The system allows transactions to be performed in which ownership of the cryptographic units is changed.
✍✍Types of Cryptocurrency
The first type of crypto currency was Bitcoin, which to this day remains the most-used, valuable and popular. Along with Bitcoin, other alternative cryptocurrencies with varying degrees of functions and specifications have been created. Some are iterations of bitcoin while others have been created from the ground up
Bitcoin was launched in 2009 by an individual or group known by the pseudonym “Satoshi Nakamoto.
As of March 2021, there were over 18.6 million bitcoins in circulation with a total market cap of around $927 billion.
The competing cryptocurrencies that were created as a result of Bitcoin’s success are known as altcoins. Some of the well known altcoins are as follows:
Litecoin
Peercoin
Namecoin
Ethereum
Cardana
Today, the aggregate value of all the cryptocurrencies in existence is around $1.5 trillion—Bitcoin currently represents more than 60% of the total value.3.
✍✍Advantages and disadvantages of Cryptocurrency
✍✍Cryptocurrency has the following advantages
Funds transfer between two parties will be easy without the need of third party like credit/debit cards or banks
It is a cheaper alternative compared to other online transactions
Payments are safe and secured and offer an unprecedented level of anonymity
Modern cryptocurrency systems come with a user “wallet” or account address which is accessible only by a public key and pirate key. The private key is only know to the owner of the wallet
✍✍Cryptocurrencies have the following disadvantages.
The almost hidden nature of cryptocurrency transactions makes them easy to be the focus of illegal activities such as money laundering, tax-evasion and possibly even terror-financing
Payments are not irreversible
Cryptocurrencies are not accepted everywhere and have limited value elsewhere
There is concern that cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are not rooted in any material goods. Some research, however, has identified that the cost of producing a Bitcoin, which requires an increasingly large amount of energy, is directly related to its market price.
✍✍How does a Cryptocurrency work?
A cryptocurrency (or “crypto”) is a digital currency that can be used to buy goods and services, but uses an online ledger with strong cryptography to secure online transactions. Much of the interest in these unregulated currencies is to trade for profit, with speculators at times driving prices skyward.
How is money made from cryptocurrency?
The most common way of earning money from cryptocurrencies is buying coins such as Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum, Ripple, and more and wait until their value rises. Once their market prices rise, they sell at a profit.
What is the main appeal of a crypto currency technology?
Central to the appeal and functionality of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is blockchain technology, which is used to keep an online ledger of all the transactions that have ever been conducted, thus providing a data structure for this ledger that is quite secure and is shared and agreed upon by the entire network of an individual node, or computer maintaining a copy of the ledger.
✍✍Cryptocurrency has the following advantages
Funds transfer between two parties will be easy without the need of third party like credit/debit cards or banks
It is a cheaper alternative compared to other online transactions
Payments are safe and secured and offer an unprecedented level of anonymity
Modern cryptocurrency systems come with a user “wallet” or account address which is accessible only by a public key and pirate key. The private key is only know to the owner of the wallet
✍✍Cryptocurrencies have the following disadvantages.
The almost hidden nature of cryptocurrency transactions makes them easy to be the focus of illegal activities such as money laundering, tax-evasion and possibly even terror-financing
Payments are not irreversible
Cryptocurrencies are not accepted everywhere and have limited value elsewhere
There is concern that cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are not rooted in any material goods. Some research, however, has identified that the cost of producing a Bitcoin, which requires an increasingly large amount of energy, is directly related to its market price.
✍✍How does a Cryptocurrency work?
A cryptocurrency (or “crypto”) is a digital currency that can be used to buy goods and services, but uses an online ledger with strong cryptography to secure online transactions. Much of the interest in these unregulated currencies is to trade for profit, with speculators at times driving prices skyward.
How is money made from cryptocurrency?
The most common way of earning money from cryptocurrencies is buying coins such as Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum, Ripple, and more and wait until their value rises. Once their market prices rise, they sell at a profit.
What is the main appeal of a crypto currency technology?
Central to the appeal and functionality of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is blockchain technology, which is used to keep an online ledger of all the transactions that have ever been conducted, thus providing a data structure for this ledger that is quite secure and is shared and agreed upon by the entire network of an individual node, or computer maintaining a copy of the ledger.
Indian Society
Census 2021
GS Paper - 1
The next census of India to be conducted in 2021 with March 1, 2021 as the reference date, except for the states of Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
The Census 2021 will be conducted in 18 languages out of the 22 scheduled languages (under 8th schedule) and English, while Census 2011 was in 16 of the 22 scheduled languages declared at that time.
It also will introduce a code directory to streamline the process
The option of “Other” under the gender category will be changed to “Third Gender”.
There were roughly 5 lakh people under "other" category in 2011.
For the first time in the 140 year history of census in India, data is proposed to be collected through a mobile app by enumerators and they will receive an additional payment as an incentive.
The Census data would be available by the year 2024-25 as the entire process would be conducted digitally and data crunching would be quicker.
Data from the Census 2011 is still being released. E.g.: The dataset on migration was published recently.
✍✍Issue of Caste Data Collection
Earlier in 2018, the Ministry of Home Affairs had declared that the Other Backward Class (OBC) category would be included in the Census 2021.
However, the Registrar-General of India (RGI) has said that only SC/ST will be included as the unreliable nature of caste data collection decreases the credibility of the results. E.g.: A person belonging to the Yadav caste writes Yadu, Yaduvanshi, etc. in the form; there is no standardisation. People sometimes even confuse caste with gotra.
The 2011 caste data, collected as part of the Socio Economic Caste Census (SECC), is yet to be released by the Centre.
Even a committee formed under former vice-chairman of NITI Aayog, Arvind Panagariya to find a way to publish the 2011 Socio-economic and Caste Census data failed to provide any tangible outcome.
The last caste-based census was conducted by the British in 1931.
✍✍Census
The census provides information on size, distribution and socio-economic, demographic and other characteristics of the country's population.
'Rig-Veda' reveals that some kind of population count was maintained during 800-600 BC in India.
Arthashastr by 'Kautilya' written in the 3rd Century BC prescribed the collection of population statistics as a measure of state policy for taxation.
During the regime of the Mughal king Akbar, the administrative report 'Ain-e-Akbari' included comprehensive data pertaining to population, industry, wealth and many other characteristics.
A systematic and modern population census, in its present form was conducted non synchronously between 1865 and 1872 in different parts of the country.
However, the first synchronous census in India was held in 1881. Since then, censuses have been undertaken uninterruptedly once every ten years.
India's last census was carried out in 2011 when the country's population stood at 121 crore. The Indian Census is one of the largest administrative exercises undertaken in the world.
Census 2021
GS Paper - 1
The next census of India to be conducted in 2021 with March 1, 2021 as the reference date, except for the states of Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
The Census 2021 will be conducted in 18 languages out of the 22 scheduled languages (under 8th schedule) and English, while Census 2011 was in 16 of the 22 scheduled languages declared at that time.
It also will introduce a code directory to streamline the process
The option of “Other” under the gender category will be changed to “Third Gender”.
There were roughly 5 lakh people under "other" category in 2011.
For the first time in the 140 year history of census in India, data is proposed to be collected through a mobile app by enumerators and they will receive an additional payment as an incentive.
The Census data would be available by the year 2024-25 as the entire process would be conducted digitally and data crunching would be quicker.
Data from the Census 2011 is still being released. E.g.: The dataset on migration was published recently.
✍✍Issue of Caste Data Collection
Earlier in 2018, the Ministry of Home Affairs had declared that the Other Backward Class (OBC) category would be included in the Census 2021.
However, the Registrar-General of India (RGI) has said that only SC/ST will be included as the unreliable nature of caste data collection decreases the credibility of the results. E.g.: A person belonging to the Yadav caste writes Yadu, Yaduvanshi, etc. in the form; there is no standardisation. People sometimes even confuse caste with gotra.
The 2011 caste data, collected as part of the Socio Economic Caste Census (SECC), is yet to be released by the Centre.
Even a committee formed under former vice-chairman of NITI Aayog, Arvind Panagariya to find a way to publish the 2011 Socio-economic and Caste Census data failed to provide any tangible outcome.
The last caste-based census was conducted by the British in 1931.
✍✍Census
The census provides information on size, distribution and socio-economic, demographic and other characteristics of the country's population.
'Rig-Veda' reveals that some kind of population count was maintained during 800-600 BC in India.
Arthashastr by 'Kautilya' written in the 3rd Century BC prescribed the collection of population statistics as a measure of state policy for taxation.
During the regime of the Mughal king Akbar, the administrative report 'Ain-e-Akbari' included comprehensive data pertaining to population, industry, wealth and many other characteristics.
A systematic and modern population census, in its present form was conducted non synchronously between 1865 and 1872 in different parts of the country.
However, the first synchronous census in India was held in 1881. Since then, censuses have been undertaken uninterruptedly once every ten years.
India's last census was carried out in 2011 when the country's population stood at 121 crore. The Indian Census is one of the largest administrative exercises undertaken in the world.
✍356 , Article 365 , Article 256 and Article 257 of the Indian Constitution
Article 356 commonly known as State Emergency or President's Rule is invoked if there has been failure of the constitutional machinery in any state of India. The essence of the Article is that upon the breach of certain defined state of affairs, as ascertained and reported by the Governor of the State concerned (or otherwise) the President concludes that the 'constitutional machinery' in the State has failed. Thereupon the President makes a 'Proclamation of Emergency,' dismissing the State Legislature and Executive. During President's rule, the Governor administers the State as the agent of the President and has the authority to appoint retired civil servants or other administrators, to assist him.
This President’s Rule can be proclaimed under Article 356 on two grounds—one mentioned in Article 356 itself i.e., subjective satisfaction of the President that a situation has arisen in which the government of a state cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
And secondly on the basis of Article 365 says that whenever a state fails to comply with or to give effect to any direction from the Centre, it will be lawful for the president to hold that a situation has arisen in which the government of the state cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
So Article 365 is basically a sub condition required for the invocation of President's Rule under Article 356.
Article 365: A Discretionary Power
It is important here to note the phraseology used in this Article. Article 365 can validly be invoked only if:
(1) any direction is given by the Union in the valid exercise of its power under any of the provisions of the Constitution; and
(2) such direction has not been complied with or given effect to by the State.
Jeevan Reddy, J. observed that Article 365 is a "permissible" provision. It merely sets out one instance in which the President may hold that the Government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
The words "it shall be lawful for the President to hold" occurring in Article 365 do not impose an obligation. They only confer power, the exercise of which is a matter of discretion with the President. On every non-compliance with the Union direction, irrespective of its extent and significance, the President (in effect the Council of Ministers) is not bound to hold that a situation has arisen in which the Government of the non-complying State cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution. The President should exercise this drastic power in a reasonable manner with due care and circumspection, and not mechanically. He should give due consideration to all relevant circumstances, including the response, if any, of the State Government to the direction. In response to the direction the State Government might satisfy the President that the direction had been issued on wrong facts or misinformation, or that the required correction has been effected. The President should also keep in mind that every insignificant aberration from the constitutional path or a technical controvention of constitutional provisions by the functionaries of the State Government would not necessarily and reasonably lead one to hold that the Government in the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution.
Provisions under which Article 365 can be invoked:
Article 356 commonly known as State Emergency or President's Rule is invoked if there has been failure of the constitutional machinery in any state of India. The essence of the Article is that upon the breach of certain defined state of affairs, as ascertained and reported by the Governor of the State concerned (or otherwise) the President concludes that the 'constitutional machinery' in the State has failed. Thereupon the President makes a 'Proclamation of Emergency,' dismissing the State Legislature and Executive. During President's rule, the Governor administers the State as the agent of the President and has the authority to appoint retired civil servants or other administrators, to assist him.
This President’s Rule can be proclaimed under Article 356 on two grounds—one mentioned in Article 356 itself i.e., subjective satisfaction of the President that a situation has arisen in which the government of a state cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
And secondly on the basis of Article 365 says that whenever a state fails to comply with or to give effect to any direction from the Centre, it will be lawful for the president to hold that a situation has arisen in which the government of the state cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
So Article 365 is basically a sub condition required for the invocation of President's Rule under Article 356.
Article 365: A Discretionary Power
It is important here to note the phraseology used in this Article. Article 365 can validly be invoked only if:
(1) any direction is given by the Union in the valid exercise of its power under any of the provisions of the Constitution; and
(2) such direction has not been complied with or given effect to by the State.
Jeevan Reddy, J. observed that Article 365 is a "permissible" provision. It merely sets out one instance in which the President may hold that the Government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
The words "it shall be lawful for the President to hold" occurring in Article 365 do not impose an obligation. They only confer power, the exercise of which is a matter of discretion with the President. On every non-compliance with the Union direction, irrespective of its extent and significance, the President (in effect the Council of Ministers) is not bound to hold that a situation has arisen in which the Government of the non-complying State cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution. The President should exercise this drastic power in a reasonable manner with due care and circumspection, and not mechanically. He should give due consideration to all relevant circumstances, including the response, if any, of the State Government to the direction. In response to the direction the State Government might satisfy the President that the direction had been issued on wrong facts or misinformation, or that the required correction has been effected. The President should also keep in mind that every insignificant aberration from the constitutional path or a technical controvention of constitutional provisions by the functionaries of the State Government would not necessarily and reasonably lead one to hold that the Government in the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution.
Provisions under which Article 365 can be invoked:
Under various provisions of the Constitution, the Union Government is authorised to issue directions to the States.
Article 256 imposes a general obligation on the States to so exercise their executive power as to ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament and the executive power of the Centre extends to the giving of such directions to a State as may appear to the Centre to be necessary for the purpose. This makes the State executive subservient to the Union executive power.
Article 257(1) provides that the executive power of the State is to be so exercised as not to impede or prejudice the exercise of the Centre's executive power and the Centre can give such directions to a State as may appear to the Central Government to be necessary for that purpose.
Under Article 257(2) the Centre may give directions to a State as to the construction and maintenance of means of communication declared in the direction to be of national or military importance, although "communications" is a State subject. However, this does not restrict the power of Parliament to declare highways or waterways to be national; nor is the Centre's power restricted with respect to the national highways or waterways nor its power to construct and maintain means of communication as part of its functions with respect to naval, military and air-force works.
Article 257(3) empowers the Centre to give directions to a State as to the measures to be taken for the protection of the Railways within the State. "Railways" is a Central subject but "police" is a State subject. Consequently the protection of railway property lies within the field of the State Government. It may be that in a particular case the Centre may desire that the railway property be protected by taking special measures by the State and for that purpose the Centre is given power to give directions to the State.
When a proclamation of emergency is made under Article 352 the executive power of the Union extends to the giving of directions to any State as to the manner in which the executive power thereof is to be exercised. This is possible by virtue of Article 353(a).
When a financial emergency is declared under Article 360 the Centre may give directions to a State, inter alia, to observe certain canons of financial propriety by virtue of Article 360(3).
In addition to the above provision, in certain matters concerning minorities and language also the Central Government has power to issue directions to the States. Under Article 339(2) the Central Government is empowered to give directions to a State as to the drawing up and execution of schemes specified in the direction to be essential for the welfare of the Scheduled Tribes in the State.
Article 344(6) empowers the President to issue directions to give effect to the recommendation of the Language Commission [appointed under Article 344(1)] after they were scrutinised by a Parliamentary Committee.
Under Article 347, on demand being made in that behalf, the President may, if he is satisfied that a substantial portion of a State desires the use of any language spoken by them to be recognised by that State, direct that such language shall also be officially recognised throughout the State or any part thereof for such purpose as he may specify.
Under Article 350-A a State is obligated to provide facilities for instruction in the mother tongue at the primary stage of children belonging to a linguistic minority and the President has been empowered to issue such directions to any State as he considers necessary.
Under para 6 of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution the President can declare areas to be scheduled areas and can issue directions in regard to the administration of these areas.
If the Union Government issues any directions under any of the provisions enumerated above and if any State Government fails to comply with them, such failure answers the situation contemplated by Article 365.
Article 256 imposes a general obligation on the States to so exercise their executive power as to ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament and the executive power of the Centre extends to the giving of such directions to a State as may appear to the Centre to be necessary for the purpose. This makes the State executive subservient to the Union executive power.
Article 257(1) provides that the executive power of the State is to be so exercised as not to impede or prejudice the exercise of the Centre's executive power and the Centre can give such directions to a State as may appear to the Central Government to be necessary for that purpose.
Under Article 257(2) the Centre may give directions to a State as to the construction and maintenance of means of communication declared in the direction to be of national or military importance, although "communications" is a State subject. However, this does not restrict the power of Parliament to declare highways or waterways to be national; nor is the Centre's power restricted with respect to the national highways or waterways nor its power to construct and maintain means of communication as part of its functions with respect to naval, military and air-force works.
Article 257(3) empowers the Centre to give directions to a State as to the measures to be taken for the protection of the Railways within the State. "Railways" is a Central subject but "police" is a State subject. Consequently the protection of railway property lies within the field of the State Government. It may be that in a particular case the Centre may desire that the railway property be protected by taking special measures by the State and for that purpose the Centre is given power to give directions to the State.
When a proclamation of emergency is made under Article 352 the executive power of the Union extends to the giving of directions to any State as to the manner in which the executive power thereof is to be exercised. This is possible by virtue of Article 353(a).
When a financial emergency is declared under Article 360 the Centre may give directions to a State, inter alia, to observe certain canons of financial propriety by virtue of Article 360(3).
In addition to the above provision, in certain matters concerning minorities and language also the Central Government has power to issue directions to the States. Under Article 339(2) the Central Government is empowered to give directions to a State as to the drawing up and execution of schemes specified in the direction to be essential for the welfare of the Scheduled Tribes in the State.
Article 344(6) empowers the President to issue directions to give effect to the recommendation of the Language Commission [appointed under Article 344(1)] after they were scrutinised by a Parliamentary Committee.
Under Article 347, on demand being made in that behalf, the President may, if he is satisfied that a substantial portion of a State desires the use of any language spoken by them to be recognised by that State, direct that such language shall also be officially recognised throughout the State or any part thereof for such purpose as he may specify.
Under Article 350-A a State is obligated to provide facilities for instruction in the mother tongue at the primary stage of children belonging to a linguistic minority and the President has been empowered to issue such directions to any State as he considers necessary.
Under para 6 of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution the President can declare areas to be scheduled areas and can issue directions in regard to the administration of these areas.
If the Union Government issues any directions under any of the provisions enumerated above and if any State Government fails to comply with them, such failure answers the situation contemplated by Article 365.
Thus Article 365 acts as a screen to prevent any hasty resort to the drastic action under Article 356 in the event of failure on the part of a State Government to comply with or to give effect to any constitutional direction given in the exercise of the executive power of the Union. The extraordinary powers under Article 365 are necessary but should be exercised with great caution and in extreme cases. Article 365 is intended not only to supply an additional ground for the President's action under Article 356 but also to restrict and confine the scope of the word "otherwise" in Article 356 to the grounds mentioned in Article 365.
✍✍Judiciary should not act as a ‘super-legislature’, says Centre
A “distressed” government has taken a leaf from former United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt's speech to indicate that the judiciary ought not to act as a “super-legislature” by entertaining a challenge to the Tribunal Reforms Act
The Union Government, in an affidavit in the Supreme Court, said it was “confused” why the judiciary thinks that the law made by Parliament and implemented by the executive is an attack on judicial independence.
Some of the provisions of the Act under challenge include the reduction of the tenure of chairpersons and members of key tribunals from five years to four. The Act mandates their minimum age for appointment be 50 years.
The new law said the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC), headed by the Prime Minister, may “preferably” make the appointment within three months of the recommendation by the Search-cum-Selection Committee (SCSC).
The law said that the recommendations of SCSC to the ACC should be of only one single name per vacant post with waitlist available.
The affidavit said each one of these issues is purely one of policy.
✍✍‘Exclusive right’
The government said it was the “exclusive right” of Parliament and the executive to frame policy and execute it.
The affidavit said it is significant that the separation of powers entrusts to Parliament and the executive the exclusive jurisdiction to decide as to what would be the best policy.
How can duration of tenure of a chairperson or members affect the independence of judiciary, the government asked.
A “distressed” government has taken a leaf from former United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt's speech to indicate that the judiciary ought not to act as a “super-legislature” by entertaining a challenge to the Tribunal Reforms Act
The Union Government, in an affidavit in the Supreme Court, said it was “confused” why the judiciary thinks that the law made by Parliament and implemented by the executive is an attack on judicial independence.
Some of the provisions of the Act under challenge include the reduction of the tenure of chairpersons and members of key tribunals from five years to four. The Act mandates their minimum age for appointment be 50 years.
The new law said the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC), headed by the Prime Minister, may “preferably” make the appointment within three months of the recommendation by the Search-cum-Selection Committee (SCSC).
The law said that the recommendations of SCSC to the ACC should be of only one single name per vacant post with waitlist available.
The affidavit said each one of these issues is purely one of policy.
✍✍‘Exclusive right’
The government said it was the “exclusive right” of Parliament and the executive to frame policy and execute it.
The affidavit said it is significant that the separation of powers entrusts to Parliament and the executive the exclusive jurisdiction to decide as to what would be the best policy.
How can duration of tenure of a chairperson or members affect the independence of judiciary, the government asked.
✍✍A shadow foreign policy for the first time
India does not have a tradition of shadow cabinets lurking behind the government in power with ready alternative approaches to policy matters. The opposition challenges government policies, but provides no alternatives to be adopted in the event of a change in government. It is only at the time of elections that a manifesto is put forward, but that does not become the policy of the government automatically. The opposition uses think tanks and NGOs to float ideas, which may become part of policy if they become publicly acceptable. Since there has been a consensus on foreign policy, a shadow foreign policy was out of the question. But for the first time, a document has emerged from the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) in the nature of an alternative to the present foreign and defence policies named ‘India’s Path to Power: Strategy in a world adrift’. It is authored by eight well-known strategists and thinkers.
India does not have a tradition of shadow cabinets lurking behind the government in power with ready alternative approaches to policy matters. The opposition challenges government policies, but provides no alternatives to be adopted in the event of a change in government. It is only at the time of elections that a manifesto is put forward, but that does not become the policy of the government automatically. The opposition uses think tanks and NGOs to float ideas, which may become part of policy if they become publicly acceptable. Since there has been a consensus on foreign policy, a shadow foreign policy was out of the question. But for the first time, a document has emerged from the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) in the nature of an alternative to the present foreign and defence policies named ‘India’s Path to Power: Strategy in a world adrift’. It is authored by eight well-known strategists and thinkers.