📰 ISRO set to launch satellite with corrected clocks
The move became imperative after all three rubidium atomic clocks on IRNSS-1A failed in mid-2016
•Indian Space Research Organisation will soon launch a replacement navigation satellite fitted with corrected atomic clocks to make up for the crippled satellite, IRNSS-1A.
•The upcoming IRNSS-1H will be sent up towards the end of August and a date is yet to be fixed, ISRO Chairman A.S. Kiran Kumar said. Its launch became imperative after all three rubidium atomic clocks on IRNSS-1A failed in mid-2016, Mr. Kumar told The Hindu . Three more clocks failed later across the fleet of seven satellites, which together had 21 atomic clocks.
•“We had problems with all [three] clocks in 1A and needed to bring in the replacement,” Mr. Kumar said, adding that the manufacturer had corrected the problem for the clocks in the new spacecraft. An internal committee had identified the cause of 1A’s failure. The new clocks are identical to the old ones.”
•The malfunctions [ The Hindu , January 30, 2017] struck the orbiting satellites even as ISRO completed putting the seventh and last regional navigation spacecraft, 1G, in orbit in April last year. The first one was put in orbit in July 2013.
•The Rs. 1,420-crore fleet, now called NAViC or Navigation Indian Constellation, is India’s own GPS-like system to give accurate information about location and time of persons or objects — in the same way as the older U.S. Global Positioning System or Russia's GLONASS.
•Positional details are vital for civil and military aviation, defence needs, ATMs and individual users, besides transport on land, sea or air.
European problem
•The clocks for ISRO’s NavIC and the European Space Agency's first 18 Galileo satellites came from the same Swiss company and developed similar problems around the same time. The two agencies had compared their navigation troubles. Mr. Kumar said the hardware solution was also similar for the two agencies.
•Clarifying that ISRO continues to use all seven satellites, he said the troubled 1A can still send low-powered messages and weather data that are useful to fishermen.
•“Basically four of these navigation satellites are sufficient for our functions. Within the 1,500 km range it makes no difference” except in the case of satellites put in geostationary orbits, he said.
•Without the clocks, IRNSS-1A gives a coarse value that cannot be used for functions that need precise data.
📰 Cattle trade ban rules were not placed before Parliament
In reply to RTI plea, Lok Sabha Secretariat says Centre did not follow procedure
•The rules banning cattle slaughter were never placed before Parliament — which the government should have done before implementing them — the Lok Sabha Secretariat has said in its reply to an RTI request by one of the petitioners who has moved the Supreme Court challenging the ban.
•Having triggered an avalanche of litigation across the country, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal (Regulation of Livestock Market) Rules of 2017, which bans the sale of cattle in livestock markets for the purpose of slaughter or animal sacrifice, is now back to the drawing board.
•Notified on May 23, the rules mandate that cattle should only be sold in animal markets for farming purposes.
•Section 38A of the Prevention of Cruelty Act of 1960 mandates that any rule made by the Centre under it ought to be laid before each House of Parliament “as soon as it is made.”
•The rules are to be placed before Parliament for a total of 30 days. Any modification agreed upon by both the Houses should be incorporated in the rules or else they would have no effect. The July 27 reply of the Lok Sabha Secretariat to petitioner Sabu Stephen’s RTI plea said Parliament had no information about the rules.
•The reply said in clear terms that the livestock rules were “not forwarded by the ministry concerned, ie, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, for laying on the table of the House so far. Hence, not laid till date.”
Rules suppressed
•“The government bypassed Parliament, suppressed the rules from the elected representatives of the people of the country and killed the parent Act... all this when over 70% of the country is affected by certain provisions of the livestock rules,” V.K. Biju, Mr. Stephen’s advocate, submitted.
•Additional Solicitor-General P.S. Narasimha admitted that he was not aware of the facts and sought an adjournment till August 9.
•“A simple reading of Section 38A tells us that you [government] cannot say ‘I will not place the rules before Parliament’,” Chief Justice J.S. Khehar, who is heading the Bench hearing the petition, said.
•Justice D.Y. Chandrachud added that Section 38A invokes the spirit that “laying a law before Parliament is important.”
•“It is an exercise of parliamentary control over the laws of the land,” Justice Chandrachud told the government. The information about the alleged lapse on the government’s part came to light during a hearing on an application filed by activist Gauri Maulekhi, who was seeking a clarification of a Supreme Court order on the issue on July 11.
•That day the court recorded the Centre’s submission that the Madras High Court had already issued a blanket stay on both Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock Market) Rules and The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Maintenance of Case Property Animals) Act, 2017.
📰 SC for centralised system to select judicial officers
•The Supreme Court on Friday indicated a favourable attitude towards a centralised selection mechanism for appointment of judicial officers in the subordinate judiciary.
•A Bench led by Chief Justice of India J.S. Khehar said the court was even ready for a day-long hearing on the issue on August 22 to amicably resolve the objections of various States and High Courts to the proposal.
‘No breach’
•The Bench tried to assuage the concern of various States and High Courts, saying there would be no breach and interference in the federal structure.
•“We are trying to do some service to the nation. It is nobody’s gain. No country can progress if there is no functional and effective judiciary. No person from abroad would like to come to India and contest his case for 15 years. Citizen should have confidence in the judiciary,” it said.
•It directed the apex court registry to send a “concept note” of the proposal allaying the objections to all the Registrars-General of the High Courts and the secretaries of States’ Law Ministries.
📰 India still talking to China, says MEA
‘Despite rising tensions, war not an option’
•Maintaining its silence on claims by the Chinese government that India has reduced troop levels on the Doklam plateau where they have been in a standoff with the PLA, the government on Friday said it would not comment on “operational details”, but continued to affirm that “war is not an option” despite rising tensions.
•“As far as questions on deployments are concerned, these are operational matters on our side or the other side and would not like to specifically go into them,” said MEA spokesperson Gopal Baglay, when asked about comments made by a senior Chinese diplomat in Delhi, who said India had reduced the number of troops sent in to stop a PLA road construction team on June 16, from about 400 at peak levels, to 48 as of Thursday.
Let the secret remain
•“We would continue to engage the Chinese side through diplomatic channels on the basis of the Astana consensus between our leaders,” he added, referring to the meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping in early June, where they had agreed not to let “differences become a dispute.”
•Asked about what diplomatic channels are still available, given a rising number of threatening statements from China, Mr. Baglay said, “If you understand the signs, you should let a secret remain a secret,” ( Ishaaron ko agar samjho toh, Raaz ko raaz ko rahne do ), a reference to a 1973 Hindi film song. The remarks by the Ministry followed External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj’s statement in Parliament on Thursday in reply to questions from the Opposition over the government’s handling of foreign policy in general and the Doklam standoff with China in particular.
•On Friday, facing several questions on the issue from journalists, the MEA added that its refusal to comment on charges made by the Chinese government over the past few days of a “transgression by Indian troops”, didn’t signify that it was unprepared for an escalation in tensions.
•In an interaction on Thursday, Chinese Deputy Chief of Mission Liu Jinsong had warned that India would face “serious consequences” if it doesn’t withdraw all its troops from the area.
📰 Motor Vehicles Bill sent to RS panel
Gadkari briefs MPs about the Bill
•A Bill seeking to bring radical changes in the transport sector by amending the nearly 30-year-old Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, would be sent to a Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha, Road Transport and Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari said after an all-party meeting here on Friday.
•Rajya Sabha MPs were briefed by Mr. Gadkari on the salient features of the Bill, which, the Minister added, would save “people from corruption” during registration of new vehicles. At many places, people are charged Rs. 2,000 to get their vehicles registered, Mr. Gadkari said.
Privatisation concerns
•Addressing concerns that the proposed legislation impinges on the rights of State governments, Mr. Gadkari said the Centre did not want to privatise State transport authorities, and that it was up to the States to accept the Bill’s provisions.
•“In the meeting of the leaders of all parties of Rajya Sabha today, chaired by Deputy Chairman P.J. Kurien, many of the parties sought more time to study the Motor Vehicles Bill, 2017, in view of very few days left in the current session. It was decided to send the Bill to the Rajya Sabha Select Committee,” Mr. Gadkari said.
•It had been agreed that the Select Committee, which will be constituted soon, would submit its report on the first day of the Winter Session and passed in that session, the Minister added.
•The Bill, which Mr. Gadkari termed “one of the biggest reforms in the sector”, aims to bring radical reforms in the transport sector.
📰 New Bill to allow States to drop no-detention policy
States may be permitted to introduce exams in Classes 5, 8
•With some Bills pertaining to education already passing muster in either House of Parliament this session, the Ministry of Human Resource Development is looking to introduce a Bill to amend the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, to enable States to do away with the no-detention policy if they wish.
•The Cabinet has cleared the introduction of the Bill and the Ministry wants it introduced in this session itself and passed in the next session.
•Twenty-five States had recently agreed with the idea of doing away with or tweaking the no-detention policy — wherein a child is not detained till Class 8 — to give a boost to levels of learning.
•Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Maharashtra did not ask for a rollback of the policy, however.
•The Centre has thus decided to allow States to take the call and to tweak the RTE Act to enable them to do so. The Bill is expected to permit States to introduce exams in Classes 5 and 8.
•Students who fail in the exams — to be held in March — will be given remedial training and offered another chance to pass in May. Those who still fail will be detained in the same class.
Falling standards
•Officials say there were complaints that the no-detention policy — aimed at retaining students in school and giving a fillip to education — led to learning levels taking a dip. The planned modification in the RTE Act is expected to arrest this trend.
•“Dropout rates till Class 8 are just 4%, but they rise to above 20% after that. This is because of the no-detention policy,” said a top HRD Ministry source.
📰 Centre starts ETF for PSUs, lenders
‘Bharat 22’ is a diversified fund comprising 22 State-owned enterprises, public sector banks: Jaitley
•Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on Friday announced the introduction of Bharat 22, a new exchange traded fund (ETF) comprising 22 stocks including Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs), public sector banks (PSBs), and Specified Undertakings of the Unit Trust of India (SUUTI).
•“The earlier ETF, the CPSE ETF, had many energy companies,” Mr. Jaitley said. “Bharat 22 is a well-diversified ETF spanning six sectors — basic materials, energy, finance, FMCG, industrials, and utilities.”
Focus on performance
•“While selecting the constituent, we tried to ensure that the Bharat 22 Index would be better performing than the previous indices,” Department of Investment and Public Asset Management (DIPAM) Secretary Neeraj Kumar Gupta said at the press conference. The CPSE ETF had raised Rs. 8,500 crore last year.
•ICICI Prudential would be the ETF Manager and Asia Index Private Ltd. would be the Index Provider.
•In his latest Budget speech, Mr. Jaitley had said that the government would be using ETFs to bolster its disinvestment efforts.
•“In 2016-17, the revised disinvestment target was Rs. 45,500 crore and the government realised Rs. 46,247 crore,” Mr. Jaitley said during the press conference on Friday. “This comprised CPSE, strategic disinvestment, and income from SUUTI. This year, the target was set at Rs. 72,500 crore and we have realised Rs. 9,300 so far.”
•The weightage in the Bharat 22 Index given to basic materials is 4.4%, energy 17.5%, finance 20.3%, FMCG 15.2%, industrials 22.6%, and utilities 20%. The banking segment includes stocks from State Bank of India, Axis Bank, Bank of Baroda, Indian Bank, Rural Electrification Corporation, and Power Finance Corporation.
•The energy segment includes Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, Indian Oil Corporation, Bharat Petroleum, and Coal India.
•“Globally ETF assets have grown significantly,” Mr. Jaitley said. “Globally today there are $4 trillion worth of assets under management (AUM). These are expected to touch $7 trillion by 2021.”
Boost for Indian Bank
•“The inclusion of Indian Bank in the ETF will give a boost to our valuation,’’ asserted its MD and CEO Kishor Kharat. “One good thing is that Navratna companies are put into ETF. If the Indian Bank is part of it, our status will go up,’’ he said.
•Investors often sought to know the government’s stake in the bank, he said. “When we go to raise equity in the market, it is always a concern for many investors as to how much the government is holding in the bank. The market always wants the government holding to come down in public sector banks. Our financial parameters are improving and if the government holding comes down, investors will get more attracted,’’ he said.
📰 Punishing the victims
The steady erosion of the anti-dowry law will endanger countless women in genuine distress
•On July 27, 2017, the Supreme Court in Rajesh Sharma & Ors vs State of U.P. & Aanr , dealt another punishing blow to what has become a toothless anti-dowry law. When first enacted in 1961, the law sought to protect women from being killed or tortured in their marital homes by greedy husbands and in-laws. Thereafter, passionate advocacy by women’s rights activists resulted in the insertion of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, making the offence of dowry harassment cognisable and non-bailable, thereby bringing enormous relief to women who face virtually insurmountable obstacles in the public space, especially when taking complaints to the police or facing long-winded judicial proceedings.
•In a sense, Section 498A sought to level the playing field and further ensure the safety of women. However, as with all laws relating to women, the patriarchal, self-fulfilling argument that Section 498A had created a bunch of monstrous, disgruntled women determined to destroy family values and drag innocent husbands and in-laws to jail for their own nefarious purposes began to dominate the discourse.
Gradual dilution
•Following this, the first attempt to dilute Section 498A came from a 2014 judgment of the Supreme Court which mandated a nine-point checklist before any arrests could be made under Section 498A. Then followed the latest Supreme Court judgment which has almost irretrievably diluted 498A and rendered it nearly unreachable to victims. This judgment mandates a family welfare committee in every district to scrutinise dowry harassment cases. Members of this committee can be social workers or “anyone interested in the subject” and may also be paid an honorarium. The police are expected to consider the recommendations of this committee before making any arrest. It is not difficult to predict how such committees will operate in our male-dominated districts. The Supreme Court has also done away with the need for the accused to make a personal appearance in court in addition to other forms of relief.
•Sadly, the victim remains ignored in the judgment. As a result of these constraints, thousands of genuinely distressed women will not be able to access justice. Women victims, it would appear, become victims only if they die. While still alive, getting justice is a Sisyphean impossibility.
Subject of debate
•The 2014 and 2017 judgments of the Supreme Court diluting Section 498A are a compelling illustration of the fact that in the discourse relating to women’s issues, any movement which is even remotely progressive and seeks to empower women immediately becomes the subject of fierce controversy. Seven decades after Independence, Parliament remains unable to pass the constitutional amendment mandating 33% reservation for women in Parliament. No other legislation in the history of India, possibly the world, has been so fiercely resisted or pending for so long. Similarly, the impact of Section 498A, which was admittedly enacted to ensure the safety of women in their matrimonial home, should have been assessed to examine its effectiveness in preventing dowry deaths and cruelty to women in their matrimonial home. Perversely, but predictably, the attention of the judges, and indeed of a large section of society, is directed solely towards the alleged, perceived “misuse” of the section by “unscrupulous” women. Ironically, the concern is leavened by a crumb of concern about women, in this case the women who are “wrongly” arrested under Section 498A — the mothers and sisters-in-law. The judges observe that women who ought to use Section 498A as a shield are actually using it as a weapon against their unfortunate in-laws, going so far as to say “this court earlier noticed the fact that most of such complaints are filed in the heat of the moment, over trivial issues”, thus leading to “harassment of the accused”. This is a breathtaking assumption, and not based upon any substantial research whatsoever, nor do the judges quote such research.
The story from data
•In fact, the statistics cited by the judges lead to a contrary conclusion. They note the earlier observation of Justice C.K. Prasad that in 2012 two lakh arrests were made under Section 498A, including 47,951 women. Although chargesheets were filed in 93.6% of the cases, the conviction rate was only 14.4%. Based on this, the judges conclude that the complaints were frivolous and “trivial”. The actual fact of the matter is that in 93.6% of the cases, the police — notoriously unsympathetic to women — found the complaints worthy of chargesheets being filed. In other words, the complaints passed police scrutiny. Further, the low conviction rate of 14.4% is more an indictment of the agonising judicial process, which is time-consuming and drains women of their resources and resolve. Many just opt for settlement out of sheer frustration.
•In 2013, the conviction rate for rape was only 27.1%. Will the court now liberalise the penal provisions against rape? Money transactions are essentially only civil transactions. Yet, dishonour of a cheque is an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The widespread misuse of this section by usurious moneylenders and financial institutions has never been publicly debated. The judiciary and civil society do not appear to ever discuss misuse or “abuse” of other laws and offences, although abuse of any law is possible, and does in fact happen. It is only when any law relating to the empowerment of women is enacted, that hysterical debate ensues about misuse of such a law and the sufferings of the accused.
•In a just society, a penal provision should be reviewed only after fully protecting the perspective of the victim. A total of 24,771 dowry deaths have occurred in India from 2012 to 2014, averaging more than 20 dowry deaths every single day. Thus, Section 498A is not only relevant but also vital for the protection of genuine victims. Alleged, perceived, and sometimes even some genuine cases of misuse of this law should not endanger the huge number of women who are in genuine distress. It is time to remember that the object of the law and democracy require that our suffering women be protected and not that safeguards for accused be constantly created.
📰 Price of rapacity
The Supreme Court has laid downa benchmark for action against illegal mining
•In ordering that lease-holders should pay compensation to the extent of 100% of the price of the quantum of minerals they had illegally extracted, the Supreme Court has gone beyond a mere affirmation of the ‘polluter pays’ principle. It has also set a significant benchmark for stringent action against those who indulge in mining without environmental or forest clearance. Even the Central Empowered Committee had recommended compensation to the extent of 30% of the value of the iron ore and manganese ore illegally mined in Odisha, but the court has been firm about not compromising on the quantum of compensation. It is impossible to dispute the court’s reasoning that the defaulter or violator should bear the consequences of the illegality, and therefore cannot be allowed the benefit of “pocketing 70% of the illegally mined ore”. The mining companies tried every possible means of avoiding the tag that they had illegally mined iron or manganese ore. Some of them argued that they did not require environmental clearance as they had started operations prior to 1994, when the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification was first issued, and that unless there was an expansion, they did not require environmental clearance. Some said “illegal mining” was limited to mining activity outside the leased area, but the court has firmly ruled that any excess extraction within the leased area would also amount to unlawful mining. It has clarified that every renewal of a mining lease would require such clearance, even if there is no expansion, modernisation or increase in the pollution load.
•The apex court has been passing a series of orders on illegal mining activity, notably in Goa and Karnataka. It has often voiced concern over the extent to which mining laws are being flouted and how illegal mining is depleting the country’s natural resources. In this verdict as well, the court identified rapacious mining in Odisha as a cause for great concern. There appears to be no effective policy or effective check on mining operations, it has noted. In strong words, it has asked the Centre to revisit its National Mineral Policy, 2008, which “seems to be only on paper and is not being enforced, perhaps due to the involvement of very powerful vested interests or a failure of nerve.” It is clear that the country is already paying a heavy price for its failure to regulate mining operations in an effective manner in several parts of the country. It has become a source for corruption, excessive exploitation of natural resources and a scourge in the lives of forest dwellers and tribals. The petitioners before the court had stressed on the principles of intergenerational equity, the responsibility of every generation to conserve resources with subsequent generations in mind while exploiting nature. The court, understandably, has not set a limit for mining activities, but it has certainly flagged some issues for those in power to bear in mind.
