📰 SC questions second chance for those left out of NRC Assam
Defers receipt of claims and objections against draft NRC from August 30 to a later date
•The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Union government whether it is giving the over 40 lakh people, excluded from the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, a “second chance” to gain citizenship by allowing them to produce fresh documents to prove their Indian legacy.
•The court was referring to the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) proposed by the government, which allows a claimant for Indian citizenship to “change his legacy” by submitting additional documents at the ‘claims and objections’ stage. The court asked whether this would amount to “re-doing the claims” of those left out from the draft NRC published on July 30.
•A Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Rohinton Nariman on Tuesday said allowing a claimant to change his legacy would amount to “tinkering with the family tree” and re-doing the verification process.
•“You see, a claimant submits documents to prove his legacy from his father. A family tree is drawn, which includes the claimant’s siblings, etc. The authorities verify his claim with each one of the member in the family tree before deciding his claim [for citizenship]. Now, your SOP says that a person can submit fresh documents claiming to prove his legacy from his grandfather. Now, the family tree has to be recreated. Everything has to be reverified. This amounts to redoing the entire exercise. Why?”, Justice Gogoi asked Attorney General K.K. Venugopal.
'Why change tack?'
•Besides, the Bench pointed out, the government, in the beginning, had specified that documents on legacy would be allowed to be filed only once. Now, it has changed tack to permit additional documents to be filed. “Are you not contradicting yourself here?” Justice Gogoi asked Mr. Venugopal.
•The court directed Assam State NRC Coordinator Prateek Hajela to file a report on the ramifications of the government's proposal to submit fresh documents. Mr. Hajela has to file his report before September 5, the next date of hearing.
•Meanwhile, the court deferred the receipt of claims and objections to a later date. This stage was supposed to start within the next days, on August 30, and would have continued till October 28.
•“Allowing a person to suddenly pull out an additional document, that too at the 'claims and objections' stage, will upset the apple cart,” Justice Nariman observed.
•Mr. Venugopal countered that the government is giving “another chance to people who risk losing all their rights”.
•To this, Justice Nariman agreed that the court was dealing with “human problems of a huge magnitude”.
•“Consequences are so severe that should they be given one more chance. Suppose a claimant has misfired once but can deliver in the next. Why should such a person not be given another chance?” Justice Nariman asked Mr. Hajela, stakeholders and petitioners in the litigation.
•To this, Mr. Hajela said reopening of family trees would risk the possibility of “trading of legacies or meeting of minds”. "Giving a second chance would only open trading in legacies. There may be people who are willing to sell the legacies to others,” he said.
Sample re-verification
•The Supreme Court further asked Mr. Hajela to submit a report with a time-frame to carry out the sample re-verification of at least 10 per cent of the names included in the final draft NRC. This is after Mr. Hajela placed before the Bench a district-wise data of the percentage of the population who have been excluded from the final draft NRC.
📰 SC finds audit of child shelters ‘frightening’
Only 54 of 2,874 homes pass muster
•The Supreme Court on Tuesday called the preliminary contents of a social audit conducted by the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) as “frightening.”
•In an affidavit filed before a Bench led by Justice Madan B. Lokur, NCPCR, represented by advocate Anindita Pujari, submitted that out of a total of 2,874 children’s homes surveyed, only 54 institutions could be given positive reviews.
•The NCPCR is carrying out an audit of child care institutions (CCIs) and other bodies such as children homes, open shelters, observation homes, special homes, places of safety, specialised adoption agencies and fit facilities under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Model Rules.
•The audit is being conducted in compliance with a Supreme Court order on May 5, 2017. The commission intends to complete the audit by October.
•The affidavit said the preliminary survey had found that out of 185 shelter homes audited across the country, only 19 institutions had “all the records of a child that they are supposed to maintain.”
•Of the 203 special adoption agencies, only eight deserved positive reviews.
•Similarly, only 16% of the 172 observation homes audited till July 31, 2018, had all the required records of the children, like case histories and who are residing there.
📰 The final frontier of populism?
How crucial constitutional questions are being fought in the highest courts in the world’s largest democracies
•If a baker refuses to make a wedding cake for a same sex couple citing his religious beliefs, is that an exercise of religious liberty or a case of discrimination against homosexuals? The Colorado Civil Rights Commission in the U.S. ruled it was a case of discrimination. The baker moved the U.S. Supreme Court where he also argued that his refusal also involved a question of the freedom of expression. Creating a wedding cake was an artistic expression and he would not do that in support of a homosexual wedding.
•The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Colorado commission’s order, in June, on the narrow grounds that its procedures were tainted by an animus towards the baker’s faith. The court, however, did not rule on the questions of religious liberty, the freedom of expression and discrimination raised by the case — which are sure to come up in the future. The Indian Supreme Court is seized of the conflict between a religious belief and charges of discrimination in a case on Sabarimala, the Kerala temple where women of a particular age are not allowed entry.
•When questions such as these come up in the context of executive or legislative action or inaction, it becomes the task of the judiciary to test them against the Constitution. There is a long-running debate in the U.S. on how the judiciary should interpret the Constitution. One school of thought, the originalists, believe that the constitutional text ought to be given the original meaning or intent that it would have at the time it was written. The evolutionists believe that the Constitution is a living document and the meaning of its text changes over time, as social attitudes change, and that the judges should interpret it accordingly.
Building a legacy
•U.S. President Donald Trump’s two picks for the Supreme Court (in less than two years in office) come from the originalist school. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh, Mr. Trump’s second nominee who awaits Senate confirmation as Supreme Court justice, came through the ranks of the Federalist Society, founded in 1982, by American conservatives and libertarians to promote originalism. Behind the smokescreen of his Twitter outbursts, Mr. Trump is building a legacy that could outlast his presidency by decades, through appointments to the higher judiciary. Unlike in the case of his foreign and trade policy, the entire spectrum of the American right wing, and the Republican Party, is solidly behind the President’s attempts to reshape the country’s judiciary. The Trump administration supported the baker’s argument in the Supreme Court.
•As of July, Mr. Trump has successfully appointed 43 judges, which includes Mr. Gorsuch, 22 appeals court judges and 20 district judges. Barack Obama and George W. Bush had each appointed only nine appeals court judges at this point in their presidencies. Dozens of more Trump nominees are awaiting Senate confirmation. Mr. Trump inherited a huge number of judicial vacancies from the Obama presidency, as the Republican-majority Senate had slowed down appointments. It even refused to consider a Supreme Court nomination made by Mr. Obama, and the vacancy was filled only with Mr. Gorsuch’s appointment.
•Mr. Trump’s nominees are not only almost entirely originalists but they are also far less diverse than the cohort of judges appointed by Mr. Obama. Only 10% of Mr. Trump’s appointees are racial or ethnic minorities; he has nominated one Hispanic and one black so far. Bringing in the highest share of non-whites in the judiciary in the history of the country, Mr. Obama had appointed 58 blacks, 31 Hispanics and 18 Asians over eight years. Out of the 324 judges he appointed, 116 were minorities. According to a Pew analysis in March, the proportion of female judges appointed by Mr. Trump was half as many as appointed by Mr. Obama. And 60% of all sitting federal judges in America are white men.
Tensions in a democracy
•Judges are not impervious to public opinion but they are not meant to be its slaves either. They do not need to win popular votes This one layer of insulation from instant public opinion enables the judiciary to be the guardian of the fundamental values of the society, which too change but over a longer period of time. The tensions between the legislative or executive branches and the judiciary are unavoidable, and to some extent desirable, in a democracy.Varying degrees of judicial review provide a way to negotiate a balance between public opinion and values in democratic societies. In India, the judiciary can review even constitutional amendments.
•When a society is in the midst of conflict over its elemental values, such tensions become more fraught. The legislative and executive branches are quicker in responding to people’s will and often, shaping it. When Franklin D. Roosevelt was legislating New Deal measures in the 1930s, the American judiciary threw a spanner in the works. The President sought authority from the U.S. Congress to appoint six new justices on the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court began to relent, and scaled back its resistance to the New Deal, and a populist takeover of the judiciary was averted.
•India also has seen a similar phase, when the judiciary resisted progressive legislative measures such as land reforms in the early years of the republic. Those tensions continued all the way until an equilibrium was reached, with the Supreme Court establishing the concept of the basic structure of the Constitution in the 1970s. Roosevelt and India’s Congress governments were pushing for redistributive measures. At the core of the tensions between the judiciary and the more political branches was the search for a balance between justice and liberty, a perennial source of conflict in a democracy.
A turbulence within
•It is one thing to expect the judiciary to be cognisant of evolving notions of rights and justice in a society, but quite another to demand the remaking of the judiciary in accordance with a majoritarian agenda. “The power granted to American courts to pronounce on the unconstitutionality of laws (is)… one of the most powerful barriers ever erected against the tyranny of the political assemblies,” Alexis de Tocqueville wrote on American democracy. The Trump movement and his judicial appointments seek to bend the judiciary to majoritarian pressures. Reshaping of the judiciary has been a core component of Mr. Trump’s populist agenda and his campaign speeches. Originalism implies the intent and meaning of a group of white, Christian men who wrote the country’s Constitution. Crucial questions on affirmative action, voting rights, immigration, abortion, religious liberty and homosexuals will be reviewed by the U.S judiciary in coming years.
•The turbulence within the Indian judiciary and in its relations with the political executive and the legislature could also be seen in the context of the ongoing populist project to reshape the country. A judiciary dismissive of the popular will could disrupt the balance of power among the branches; but a judiciary subservient to majoritarianism will certainly undermine democracy.
📰 Pieces of the Asian dream
India should maximise its soft power in South, East and Southeast Asia even as it resets ties with China
•This has so far been the year of the India-China reset. From the informal Narendra Modi-Xi Jinping summit at Wuhan on April 27-28 to Prime Minister Modi’s keynote speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on June 1, to the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit in June 9 at the Chinese port city of Qingdao, all have sparked a lot of analysis as to what kind of strategic positioning India is gearing itself into at a time when the U.S. and China are caught up in geopolitical rivalry in the Asia-Pacific. In Singapore, Mr. Modi’s speech proclaimed India’s ambitions to garner influence in the Indo-Pacific region by increasing engagement with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), developing friendship with China, maintaining cordial ties with Russia, pursuing interests with Australia and engaging more with the U.S. The question is, what shape will India’s lead take?
Tug of power
•The reality is that the tug of power between India and China continues to impact sea lanes and chokepoints, with these two Asian giants pursuing interests in the littoral states spread across the Indo-Pacific. While India pursues influence through heightened diplomatic, bilateral and military engagement, China has started to garner influence through hard investments in cash-strapped littoral nations suffering from massive infrastructural deficits. China’s heavy investments in ASEAN nations have brought these nations closer into its orbit of influence to the point where despite an international ruling against its activities in the South China Sea (SCS), the ASEAN as a bloc agreed to cooperate with China on a Code of Conduct instead of pursuing the international ruling.
•The influence of China on certain ASEAN states like Cambodia has been such that during the 2016 ASEAN ministerial meeting, Phnom Penh refused to endorse the joint communiqué if it referred to the international court ruling against Beijing. China is today Cambodia’s largest provider of foreign aid and has invested in dams, oilfields, highways, textile operations and mines. In the Philippines, President Rodrigo Duterte has been seeking rapprochement with China, especially after 2016, when U.S. legislators blocked the sale of about 26,000 M4 rifles. Beijing provided rifles worth about $3.3 million to the Philippines police and guns worth $7.35 million to fight against extremists in the city of Marawi. Although India enjoys cordial relationship with all ASEAN nations, it is unlikely that diplomatic hobnobbing alone will help garner the grouping’s support for its Indo-Pacific strategy against China’s raw cash power and growing military presence. ASEAN’s trade with China far surpasses that with India, and Chinese foreign direct investment in ASEAN is nine times higher than India’s.
•India also has so far failed to provide any concrete plans for its immediate neighbourhood in South Asia, with countries like Nepal and Sri Lanka demonstrating interest in partnering with China. Souring of relations with Nepal due to the 2015 fuel blockade and failed strategic interventions in Sri Lanka have both undermined India’s regional leadership. On the other hand, China’s multibillion dollar investments in Sri Lankan ports and cities have inched the country much closer to China, and last year Sri Lanka handed over its Hambantota port to China on a 99-year lease. Under its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China has over the years promised billions to littoral states in the Indian Ocean Region to build a series of ports, something resource-constrained India will find difficult to match.
•However, the overt-assertiveness of China has driven many countries in East and Southeast Asia to seek friendship with India, and today Indonesia and Singapore are looking to bolster relations with India. ASEAN has a cultural affinity with India with its shared religious diversity, ancient ties and a sizeable Indian diaspora in countries like Singapore and Malaysia. After the U.S., India enjoys global soft power through its art, literature, music, dance and cinema. India is perceived by many in East Asia as a friendly democracy, making the country a safe ally to have in the long run. Japan has significantly increased its engagement with India and the two countries enjoy robust military ties. India and Australia have initiated the ‘2+2’ dialogue signalling Canberra’s interest in deepening a maritime security partnership with India. But India still has to develop a strategy to leverage its soft power and optimise its military power to effectively counter China’s cash and hard power.
The big reset
•With China, India can strike a better strategic bargain compared to the smaller states in the region. For example, it would be difficult for China to take forward the BRI without participation from India, which has reservations on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). By demonstrating a willingness to join the BRI, India can positively influence China to reevaluate the details of the CPEC. With a strategic partnership with China, India can better pursue its own regional groupings like the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) and Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal (BBIN) initiative. Since India can’t match China’s resource spending, strategic understanding with China can help streamline regional connectivity projects and help India gain influence in the region. At the SCO Summit, Mr. Xi renewed China’s agreement with India on sharing data on the cross-border flow of waters from the Brahmaputra during the flood season, and the two countries signed a protocol that would enable all varieties of rice exports from India to China, a demand India has been pressing for quite some time to rectify its adverse balance of payments against China. Mr. Xi has also suggested a trade target of $100 billion by 2020, signalling a gradual thaw in relations.
•India is clearly seeking its rightful place in the league of nations by outlining its geopolitical role, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region. What remains to be seen is how, with limited resources, India’s ambitions will play out against a resourceful and assertive China.
📰 Easing tensions: on U.S.-Mexico trade deal
The bilateral deal between the U.S. and Mexico offers hope of winding down global trade wars
•Amid rising global trade tensions, there are some signs to hope that all is not lost. The United States and Mexico on Monday reached a breakthroughbilateral trade agreement replacing the decades-old North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) after Mexico agreed to concessions demanded by the Donald Trump administration. According to the new agreement, 75% of all automobile content must be made regionally, which is higher than the current level of 62.5%. Further, 40-45% of such content must be manufactured using labour that costs at least $16 an hour. The U.S. hopes that this will discourage manufacturers from moving their facilities to Mexico, where labour is available at rates lower than in the U.S. It has also invited Canada to join talks for a renegotiation of trade terms in favour of U.S. interests. Notably, the U.S.-Mexico bilateral trade deal comes in the aftermath of President Trump’s statement in June that he might enter into separate trade agreements with Canada and Mexico, thus effectively junking the tripartite NAFTA deal. U.S. stocks rallied after news of the deal, with the Nasdaq Composite index moving above the 8,000 level for the first time ever and the Dow Jones index breaking above 26,000. The market reaction was probably a sign of relief, riding on hopes that tit-for-tat tariff wars between the U.S. and its trade allies could now draw to a close. It is worth noting that Mexico had earlier joined hands with other economies such as Canada, China and the European Union to impose retaliatory tariffs against the U.S.
•Mexico’s decision could set an example for other countries which have resorted to retaliatory tariffs to deal with Mr. Trump’s aggressive trade war against them. China has been at the forefront of this approach, slapping tariffs on several U.S. goods, together worth billions of dollars. There can be no doubt that Mr. Trump’s protectionist trade policy, including the current deal which increases restrictions on cross-border trade in order to protect U.S. jobs, is bad for the global economy. However, the best way to win the trade war against the U.S. may simply be to accept “defeat” by refusing to double down on retaliatory tariffs. The reason for such a response is simple. Retaliatory tariffs can only cause further harm to the world economy by increasing the burden of taxes on the private sector, which is crucial to spur growth and create jobs. Further, there is no reason for America’s trading partners, in an attempt to protect their domestic producers, to repeat Mr. Trump’s mistake of depriving domestic consumers of access to useful foreign goods. The right response to Mr. Trump’s trade war will be to abstain from any mutually destructive tit-for-tat tariff regimes while simultaneously pushing for peace talks.
📰 Stagnation post-summit
The denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula remains elusive
•Ever since his June 12 Singapore summit with U.S. President Donald Trump, the perception that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un was the real winner of that parley has strengthened.
•Foremost, the joint declaration issued at the end of that meeting made merely a token reference to the ultimate U.S. objective of North Korea’s unilateral surrender of nuclear weapons. The lack of specifics was a huge diplomatic advantage for a regime that has already detonated six atomic devices. It consequently heightened speculation that North Korea is a nuclear weapons-capable state and triggered demands for complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation. Second, soon after the summit, Mr. Trump offered to suspend what he called “war games”, a reference to the military exercises carried out jointly by the U.S. and South Korea, for the duration of negotiations with the North. He referred to these exercises as “tremendously expensive” and “provocative”. That concession is significant given that the leaders did not agree to a denuclearisation timetable in Singapore. This was a radical departure from the President’s previous muscular approach. In August 2017, Mr. Trump threatened North Korea with “fire and fury” like the world has never known. In January, he taunted Mr. Kim that his own nuclear button was bigger and more powerful than that of the North Korean leader.
•The U-turn on military exercises set off a scramble among White House officials, who later clarified that while a major exercise scheduled for this month would be cancelled, routine drills and training between the U.S. and South Korea will continue. Washington’s shift could not have enthused North Korea more as it has long seen military activities in its neighbourhood as confrontational.
•This is not all. Pyongyang has so far dodged U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s repeated demand to hand over a large proportion of its nuclear stockpile. Even the more basic question of the number of bombs in its possession remains unknown. The Kim regime has dismantled a rocket launch site, but that may not necessarily impede its missile launch capability, say experts. That leaves the handover by North Korea of the purported remains of U.S. soldiers the only concrete outcome so far since Singapore.
•A public confirmation of the current diplomatic deadlock is the cancellation of Mr. Pompeo’s trip to Pyongyang this week at President Trump’s instance. Acknowledging the setback, Mr. Trump tweeted that not enough progress had been made to denuclearise the Korean Peninsula and partly blamed China for not doing enough. In a sense, the latest twists and turns bear echoes of the uncertainties over the June 12 summit between the two leaders. While the seesaw continues, the world must hope neither side loses balance.
📰 Rohingya ask UN to deliver justice
•Rohingya leaders in Bangladesh on Tuesday challenged the UN to ensure that Myanmar’s generals stand trial after investigators called for top military commanders to be prosecuted for genocide against the minority.
•A UN fact-finding mission into violations in Myanmar said the country’s Army chief and five other senior brass should be investigated over a brutal crackdown last year that drove 7,00,000 Rohingya Muslims into Bangladesh. Community leaders for the Rohingya in Bangladesh welcomed calls for prosecution, but said they would judge the UN on its ability to deliver justice.
Call for ICC trial
•“The commanders must face an ICC trial,” said Rohingya leader Abdul Gowffer, referring to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The investigators have called on the UN Security Council to refer the case to the ICC or for the creation of an ad hoc tribunal.
•Dil Mohammad, another Rohingya leader, urged the UN to take further steps to ensure their safe return to Rakhine State, a process that has stalled with Bangladesh and Myanmar blaming each other for the delay. “Many things need to be done very quickly so we can return to our land in dignity and safety,” he said.
📰 China’s ‘Type 002’ begins sea trials
They will verify aircraft carrier’s communication and navigation instruments
•China’s second aircraft carrier, Type 002, being built at Dalian shipyard, has started the second phase of sea trials, state media has reported.
•Sea trials are essential to test and fine-tune a brand new ship’s complex systems, paving the way for its entry into the Navy. China Daily quoted a unnamed Chinese Navy researcher that he expected the second sea trial to mainly verify the carrier’s communication, navigation and other electronic and mechanical instruments.
•But analysts say that China’s new warship is unlikely to become a game-changer. For starters, it appears similar to Liaoning — China’s only aircraft carrier bought from Ukraine. The Liaoning underwent 10 sea trials starting in August 2011 before entering service in September 2012. The new warship has an estimated displacement of around 50,000 tonnes, similar to that of Liaoning.
•The National Interest — a U.S. publication — points out on its website that Type 002 retains conventional propulsion and a ski-jump for assisted takeoffs, quite like the Liaoning.
•There are only minor changes in the superstructure, including new advanced electronically scanned array radars. The new carrier will board 24 to 30 J-15 fighters — slightly more than Liaoning.
Recalibrating posture
•The Type 002, however, compares poorly with much larger U.S. aircraft carriers, which usually have a more than 85,000 tonne displacement. It is likely that the U.S. military power will be further enhanced in the Indo-Pacific under the Donald Trump administration, which is already engaged in a trade war with China.
•China is also working on a third aircraft carrier in Shanghai, which will stand in the premier league of similar platforms. The Type 003 is being developed on the same lines as the U.S. Navy’s super-carriers, says another National Interestarticle.
•The new ship will be powered by a nuclear engine. It is estimated that by 2020, the Chinese Navy will have 351 warships — a significant advance from the present level, but no match to the heavy arsenal of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command spread across a string of military bases in the Indo-Pacific.
📰 India’s most polluted: 30% have no clean up plan
Ahmedabad, Bengaluru and Nagpur are among the cities yet to submit their pollution control proposal
•A good number of India’s most polluted cities are not too keen to clean up their act, according to a list maintained by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). Of the 102 cities singled out by the Centre for their alarming pollution levels, only 73 have submitted a plan of remedial action to the CPCB. Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Nagpur and Jaipur are among the prominent cities that are yet to submit their plans.
•These so called ‘non-attainment cities’ were among those marked out by the CPCB and asked – as part of the National Clean Air Campaign (NCAP) – to implement 42 measures aimed at mitigating air pollution. These included steps such as implementing control and mitigation measures related to vehicular emissions, re-suspension of road dust and other fugitive emissions, bio-mass, municipal solid waste burning, industrial pollution, and construction and demolition activities.
•The directives to take remedial measures were initially issued to Delhi NCR, and subsequently to the State Pollution Control Boards for implementation in other ‘non-attainment’ cities. The non-attainment cities are those that have fallen short of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for over five years. Union Environment Minister Harsh Vardhan had said in April that the aim of pollution mitigation measures was to cut overall pollution in these cities by 35% in the next three years.
•The NCAP also envisions setting up 1,000 manual air-quality-monitoring stations (a 45% increase from the present number) and 268 automatic stations (from 84 now). “Some cities submitted plans but didn’t fill out particulars, such as timelines, and so they had to be returned,” said Prashant Gargava, Member Secretary, CPCB, adding, “Only 30 of these cities are ready to roll out their plans on the ground.”
•In May, the World Health Organisation said that Delhi and Varanasi were among 14 Indian cities that figured in a global list of the 20 most polluted cities in terms of PM2.5 levels.
📰 From unemployment to weaver shortage
4,000 more powerlooms to work on Bathukamma sarees
•Gone are the days when powerloom weavers resorted to suicides due to unemployment and debts, owing to crisis in the powerloom industry in Sircilla textile town, also called as the Sholapur of Telangana.
•Now, it’s the other way round. The migration of powerloom weavers from Sircilla to Bhiwandi, Surat and other parts of the country in search of employment has stopped. On the other hand, they have returned to their native Sircilla as their hands are full ever since the government chose them for weaving Bathukamma sarees.
•The State government had placed bulk orders worth ₹300 crore for weaving 90 lakh Bathukamma sarees, including blouses, in 80 colours in the month of March this year. The sarees are to be distributed during the ensuing Bathukamma festival in October. The weavers have achieved 50 % of the target and are working in two shifts to complete the orders before October 5.
•A decade ago, weavers in Sircilla had no work and migrated to other places. Now, there is a shortage of weavers to work on the powerlooms. Initially, the Bathukamma sarees were produced on 6,000 powerlooms and later increased to 12,000 looms. Now, the work is going on full steam on 16,000 powerlooms to produce the sarees to meet the target.
•Hailing the State government’s decision that has resulted in round-the-clock employment for weavers with good wages, Samalla Mallesham, leader of the powerloom workers union affiliated to AITUC, suggested that the government should bring out a calendar scheduling the weaving cycles so that targets are met easily.
•Though more than 2,000 weavers have returned from Bhiwandi and Surat to work on powerlooms in Sircilla, there is still shortage of weavers. The powerlom weavers are working from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. in two shifts. Accepting that there was shortage of weavers in Sircilla, AD (handlooms and textiles) V Ashok Rao said they were taking measures to increase the number of powerlooms from existing 16,000 to 20,000 and also minimise wastage of timeto produce the bathukamma sarees.
📰 Villagers resent loss of high-value cattle
Study of villages around Bandipur Tiger Reserve lists growing predation
•Fluctuating coffee prices, lower demand for cow dung as manure and increasing foreign cattle varieties may be part of the changing local economy, fuelling man-carnivore conflict around the Bandipur Tiger Reserve.
•In the centre of this could be the replacement of native cows with the more expensive “hybrid” cattle, note researchers Jared D. Margulies from the University of Sheffield, and Krithi K. Karanth from the Wildlife Conservation Society, in a paper being published in journal Geoforum in October.
•Researchers looked at six primary villages in Gudlupet taluk of Chamarajanagar district, which borders the northern edge of the Bandipur Tiger Reserve. Ms. Karanth’s previous research had shown that 15% of households in the economically-backward area had suffered livestock loss due to leopards and tigers. The average loss was around Rs. 2,190, a significant amount when considering that a majority of households earn less than Rs. 5,000 monthly.
Demand for cow dung
•In the 1990s and early 2000s, rising coffee prices had seen many locals earn an income through sale of dung from their indigenous scrub cattle, which are bred in herds and allowed to graze in forests. One sack of dung brought the villagers around Rs. 40 when sold to coffee planters.
•However, by the late 2000s, coffee prices stagnated, while the cost of labour shot by over three times in the State. Coffee planters shifted to less labour-intensive synthetic fertilizer sprays instead of using cow dung.
•Hit by the decline and with curbs of grazing in forests, the population of scrub cattle declined, while the more-expensive hybrid cattle which yielded better milk was preferred. In Gundlupet, researchers note that between 2003-12, ownership of scrub cattle reduced by 40.6%, while, ownership of hybrid cattle increased by a staggering 85.5%.
•Interviews of villagers reveal the increasing cultural intolerance to predation of these livestock. The loss of scrub cattle during grazing in forests was tolerated. However, hybrid cattle, which can’t be allowed to graze in forests and kept in cow sheds in villages, are expensive. There was a perception that tigers preyed on this cattle in villages.
•Moreover, with little employment opportunity in the tourism sector, these attacks were worsening cultural intolerance towards tigers, says the study.
📰 Govt. scraps scientific panels, forms council
New nine-member PM-STIAC, headed by Principal Scientific Adviser, to provide advice to various Ministries
•The government has scrapped two Scientific Advisory Committees (SAC) for the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, and replaced them with a nine member, Prime Minister’s Science, Technology and Innovation Advisory Council (PM-STIAC).
•According to a government note, the members of the panel are Dr V.K. Saraswat, former chief, Defence Research and Development Organisation; A.S. Kiran Kumar, former Chairman, Indian Space Research Organisation; Prof Ajay Kumar Sood, Professor, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru; Maj Gen Madhuri Kanitkar, Dean, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune; Prof Sanghamitra Bandopadhyay, Director, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata; Subhash Kak, Professor, Oklahoma State University; Manjul Bhargava, Professor, Princeton University and the lone member from industry Baba Kalyani, MD, Bharat Forge.
•Unlike in the earlier SACs, secretaries of various scientific ministries such as education, environment and health would be ‘special invitees’ to the council meetings. The PM-STIAC will be chaired by the government’s Principal Scientific Advisor, Dr K. Vijay Raghavan.
•“This is so that members are allowed free discussions outside the comfort zone of officials,” Dr. Raghavan told The Hindu in a text message.
•While industry representatives were present in greater numbers in the earlier SACs, a single, industry member, particularly given the government’s call to industry to increase jobs via entrepreneurship, is not an anomaly, Dr Vijay Raghavan said. There was a separate, dedicated group—involving the Cabinet Secretary and the PSA to focus on driving innovation all the way to commercialisation, he said.
•The newly constituted body is expected to act as a high level advisory body to several ministries and execute mission-oriented programmes. The office of the PSA was earlier led by R. Chidambaram, who played a key role in shaping India’s nuclear programme.
