📰 UGC issues guidelines for reopening of colleges and universities
Only institutions outside the containment zones could be reopened, and students and staff living in these zones would not be allowed to attend physical classes
•Reopening of colleges and universities should start with libraries and laboratories, research scholars, science and technology postgraduates, and final year students, according to the University Grants Commission guidelines issued on Thursday. For all other students, online and distance learning would continue to be the preferred method.
•More than seven months after educational institutions across the country were closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, some students are now set to return to campuses in a cautious and gradual manner.
•Only institutions outside the containment zones could be reopened, and students and staff living in these zones would not be allowed to attend physical classes, the guidelines said.
•The Union Home Ministry had given the States permission to reopen schools and colleges from October 15, depending on the local situation, while continuing to follow safety protocols. Several States have announced plans to reopen high schools and colleges and universities this month.
•For the Centrally funded institutions, it was up to the head of each institution to take a decision on reopening if they were satisfied with the feasibility of physical classes. All other institutions, whether private or State-funded, must depend on the decision of the respective State governments, the guidelines said.
•Administrative offices, research laboratories and libraries would be the first to reopen, followed by students of all research programmes and postgraduate students in science and technology programmes. Final year undergraduates may also be allowed to join for academic and placement purposes.
Online learning
•Other students have been encouraged to continue online learning but may visit their departments in small groups for consultation with faculty members, after seeking prior appointments to avoid crowding, said the guidelines. Online study materials and access to e-resources must be provided to those who chose not to attend physical classes, as well as for international students.
•Only 50% of the student strength would be allowed on a campus at a time, and all facilities would be disinfected regularly. All personnel on campus would be required to wear face masks, and follow hand-sanitising practices. However, maintaining six feet distance was only recommended “as far as feasible”, and detection of illness was based on self-monitoring rather than mandatory temperature checks. The installation of Aarogya Setu app was being recommended wherever possible. Institutions were free to mandate stricter rules.
•Although the guidelines discourage hostel reopening, they would be permitted so long as there is no sharing of rooms and 14-day quarantines are imposed on the students coming from other locations.
•Institutions must create an advance plan to handle inflow at entry and exit points, monitor disinfecting measures, safety and health conditions, screen and detect infected persons, and carry out containment measures, and must also make a separate back-up plan in case the institution needs to be closed again due to the renewed spread of the virus on campus or in surrounding areas.
‘The insult should be specifically intended to humiliate the victim for his caste’
•All insults or intimidations to persons belonging to Dalit or tribal communities will not be an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Supreme Court said in a judgment on Thursday
•An offence is made out under the statute only if the insults or intimidations were made on account of the victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, the court.
•“All insults or intimidations to a person will not be an offence under the Act unless such insult or intimidation is on account of victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe,” a three-judge Bench led by Justice L. Nageswara Rao observed.
•The court said the insult should be specifically intended to humiliate the victim for his caste.
•“Offence under the Act is not established merely on the fact that the informant [complainant] is a member of Scheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for the reason that the victim belongs to such caste,” the court said.
•The court said the object of the Act is to punish the violators who inflict indignities, humiliations and harassment.
•“It is intended to punish the acts of the upper caste against the vulnerable section of the society for the reason that they belong to a particular community,” the judgment noted.
•The court was hearing an appeal filed by a man, Hitesh Verma, booked under the Act for allegedly abusing a Dalit woman in her house.
•The court found that allegations against Verma do not fulfil the basic ingredient under the Act that such humiliation should have happened in public view.
•Since the incident occurred within four walls in the absence of members of the public, allegations against Verma under the Act do not stand. He can be tried under ordinary criminal law.
📰 The forgotten fact of China-Occupied Kashmir
The anniversary of the Instrument of Accession last month is a reminder of China’s illegal territorial occupation
•Following the abrogation of Article 370 and reorganisation of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), a China-Pakistan tandem has emerged to internationalise the issue, including in the UN Security Council. Pakistan has feigned solidarity with the people of Kashmir and continues to train and fund separatists and terrorists. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global watchdog that monitors terror financing, has retained Pakistan on its ‘Grey List’ for a good reason. China’s support for Pakistan is motivated by a desire to perpetuate its own territorial grab in the trans-Karakoram Shaksgam Tract of Kashmir.
Legitimately India’s
•China treats the J&K issue as a “bilateral dispute left over from history” to be resolved between India and Pakistan. It has turned a blind eye to the constitutional shenanigans by which Pakistan’s so-called federal Ministry of Kashmir Affairs and Gilgit-Baltistan has acquired complete sway over Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK). It ignores Pakistan’s agenda of integrating Gilgit-Baltistan as its fifth province. Yet, China has the temerity to question the establishment of the Union Territory of Ladakh and to term it a ‘unilateral’ attempt to change “the status quo in the Kashmir region”. China has no locus standi to comment on India’s internal affairs since the erstwhile princely State of J&K acceded to India through the Instrument of Accession on October 26, 1947.
•The Shaksgam valley in the trans-Karakoram tract, part of PoK, was handed over on a platter by a supine Pakistan to China through an illegal border agreement on March 2, 1963. However, the continuing Chinese occupation of Kashmir’s territory does not find adequate mention in the contemporary discourse surrounding this issue.
•China occupies 5,180 square kilometres in the Shaksgam Valley in addition to approximately 38,000 square kilometres in Aksai Chin. China and Pakistan have colluded to obfuscate these facts, even as they brazenly promote the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) which runs through parts of Indian territory under their respective occupation.
History, underhand methods
•Historically, China played an insidious role in changing the frontiers of Jammu and Kashmir through fictitious claims and unscrupulous alliances with local chieftains. China exploited the ‘Great Game’ between British India and Russia in the late 19th century. It pitched territorial claims far beyond the traditional frontiers of Xinjiang. It gradually crept into areas in the Taghdumbash Pamirs and the Karakorams, well south of its frontier along the Kun Lun mountains.
