Content:
- Centre directs States to hold ‘civil defence’ drills
- Detaining non-citizens and the rule of law
- Hydrogen versus battery: The cost of clean public transport
- At WTO, U.S. queries India’s PLI scheme for speciality steel
- India’s Forest Rights Act stands apart from exclusionary laws globally
Centre directs States to hold ‘civil defence’ drills
Context and Background
- Triggering Event: Directive follows the Pahalgam attack, intensifying India-Pakistan tensions.
- Historical Linkage: Similar civil defence measures were prominent during the Indo-Pak wars of 1965 and 1971, involving blackouts and evacuation drills.
- Strategic Objective: To strengthen passive defence preparedness under growing threats of hybrid and cross-border warfare.
Relevance : GS 3(Internal Security)
Directive Details
- Issued by: Union Ministry of Home Affairs via Directorate General of Civil Defence (DGCD).
- Coverage: Drills to be held up to village level in 244 identified districts.
- Schedule: Nationwide exercises from Wednesday to Friday.
Components of the Drill
- Air-raid sirens, blackout protocols, and evacuation drills.
- Camouflaging of vital infrastructure (power plants, military depots).
- Hotlines with the Indian Air Force for rapid response.
- Control rooms and bunker maintenance to be reactivated.
Civil Participation and Local Preparedness
- Approx. 4 lakh volunteers from Civil Defence to be engaged.
- Backward Linkages:
- Community-based Disaster Management (CBDM) model used in disaster-prone areas (e.g., Odisha cyclones).
- Integration with NDMA frameworks under the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
- Draws from past training models used in border areas during Kargil conflict (1999).
Strategic and Policy Perspective
- Civil defence cited as “integral to passive defence strategy”.
- Emphasis on non-combatant preparedness amid non-linear threats like drone warfare, cyberattacks, and state-sponsored terrorism.
- Reinforces Centre-State coordination under Entry 1 (Defence) and Entry 2 (Public Order) of the Union and State Lists respectively.
Significance and Implications
- Builds resilience in vulnerable populations, especially in border and conflict-prone zones.
- Strengthens inter-agency collaboration (IAF, local administration, health, police).
- Prepares the nation for multi-domain threats, echoing comprehensive national security doctrine.
Detaining non-citizens and the rule of law
Context and Legal Basis
- Legal Instruments Used: Detention of non-citizens in India is primarily carried out under:
- Foreigners Act, 1946
- National Security Act (NSA), 1980
- Assam NRC Impact: 19 lakh people excluded from the National Register of Citizens (NRC), many declared non-citizens and subjected to detention.
Relevance : GS 2(Governance, International Relations)
Constitutional and Judicial Principles
- Article 21: Guarantees protection of life and personal liberty to all persons (citizens and non-citizens).
- Article 22: Provides safeguards against arbitrary preventive detention, including:
- Right to be informed of grounds of arrest
- Right to consult a legal practitioner
- Right to be presented before a magistrate within 24 hours
- Judicial Power & Common Law Tradition:
- Liberty can only be curtailed through judicial process or preventive detention under strict constraints.
- Detention should be purpose-driven (trial, punishment, or legitimate preventive need).
Assam Detention Practices: Violations & Concerns
- Violation of due process:
- Detainees not charged or convicted of any criminal offence.
- Citizenship stripped on documentary grounds often flawed (e.g., spelling errors, floods destroying records).
- Indefinite & Arbitrary Detention:
- No realistic prospect of deportation — only 39 deportations since 2017 against 1.59 lakh declared ‘foreigners’.
- No legitimate purpose: Detention serves no penal, preventive, or removal purpose — making it constitutionally void under Article 21.
Backward Linkages
- ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976): Earlier upheld suspension of liberty during Emergency; later criticised.
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Landmark ruling that any procedure depriving liberty must be “just, fair, and reasonable.”
- K.S. Puttaswamy (2017): Reaffirmed Article 21’s expansive protection of liberty and dignity.
- International Human Rights Norms:
- Violates Article 9 of ICCPR: Prohibition against arbitrary detention.
- UNHCR standards discourage detention where repatriation is not possible.
Comparative Jurisprudence
- Australia – NZYQ Case (2023):
- High Court held indefinite detention without realistic removal prospects unconstitutional.
- Reinforces judiciary’s role in guarding liberty.
- India – Rajubala Das v. Union of India (2020):
- Challenge to NRC-related detention pending.
- Raises question: Can India indefinitely detain stateless individuals?
Larger Implications
- Threat to Rule of Law:
- Executive overreach undermines separation of powers and judicial oversight.
- Weakens constitutional commitment to liberty, fairness, and legality
- Humanitarian Crisis:
- Statelessness leads to permanent legal limbo, with no rights and no nationality
- Need for Legal Reform:
- Update Foreigners Act, 1946 to align with modern constitutional jurisprudence and human rights standards.
Hydrogen versus battery: The cost of clean public transport
Context: Urbanisation & Pollution Challenge
- By 2050, ~70% of people in developing countries will live in urban areas → higher demand for clean public transport.
- In India, PM2.5 pollution caused ~30,000 deaths annually (2008–2019) in 10 major cities.
- Highest in Mumbai (5,100), followed by Kolkata (4,678) and Chennai (2,870).
Relevance : GS 1(Society, Urbanisation),GS 3((Technology)
Rise of Electric Vehicles (EVs)
- Global EV count reached 40 million in 2023 (35% rise from 2022).
- Dominated by battery electric vehicles (BEVs).
- Majority of EV sales:
- China (over 50%)
- Europe and the U.S. follow.
BEVs vs. FCEVs (Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles)
Fuel Cell Advantages:
- Faster refuelling (5–15 minutes).
- Longer range and better for extreme climates or terrain.
- Lighter weight due to high energy density.
Current Status:
- FCEVs = 93,000 units globally (1 for every 330 BEVs).
- High upfront cost: 20–30% more expensive than BEVs.
- Prices of FCEVs and BEVs expected to converge by 2030.
Operational Costs Comparison (per km):
- Diesel bus: $0.27
- Electric bus: $0.17 (cheapest)
- Blue hydrogen bus: $0.84
- Green hydrogen bus: $0.91
➡ Hydrogen vehicles remain economically unviable for now.
India’s EV Landscape (2023):
- EVs = 5% of total vehicle sales.
- Electric cars: 80,000 units (70% YoY growth).
- Three-wheelers:
- India leads globally (0.58 million units), surpassing China.
- India = 60% of global electric 3-wheeler sales.
- Two-wheelers:
- India = second-largest market (0.88 million units).
- China leads with 6 million units.
- China, India, ASEAN dominate >95% of global e-2W and e-3W market.
Key Takeaway
- Battery electric vehicles are currently more cost-effective and widely adopted.
- Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have niche advantages but remain costly to operate and rare.
- India’s growth is strongest in electric 2- and 3-wheelers, aligning with urban mobility needs.
At WTO, U.S. queries India’s PLI scheme for speciality steel
Context : U.S. Concerns at WTO
- The U.S. questioned India’s PLI scheme for specialty steel at the WTO Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Duties.
- Main concern: Why promote steel production via subsidies when there is global overcapacity in steel?
- The U.S. implied the scheme may distort global markets and go against fair trade principles.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations) ,GS 3(Indian Economy)
India’s Stand
- Objective: Reduce import dependence on high-grade/specialty steel and boost self-sufficiency.
- Despite being the 2nd largest steel producer, India is a net importer of specialty steel (including in FY25).
- PLI scheme aims to:
- Promote value-added steel production.
- Modernize technology and move up the value chain.
- Advance Atmanirbhar Bharat (self-reliant India).
Details of the PLI Scheme
- Launched in 2021, the PLI scheme covers 14 sectors, including specialty steel.
- Outlay for specialty steel: ₹6,322 crore (part of ₹1.97 lakh crore overall PLI budget).
- No export obligations or export-linked incentives – hence WTO compliant, according to India.
- Focus is purely on investment promotion and domestic sales growth.
India vs. Global Context
- India’s subsidies are modest compared to China’s $50 billion in estimated steel subsidies.
- India argues that its scheme addresses domestic gaps, not global market manipulation.
- Points to continued net import status as proof that overcapacity is not an Indian issue.
WTO & Policy Implications
- The issue highlights increasing scrutiny of industrial policies under WTO norms.
- It underscores a broader geopolitical-economic divide over the right to industrial development support in emerging economies.
- May also lead to bilateral trade discussions or countervailing investigations if escalated.
India’s Forest Rights Act stands apart from exclusionary laws globally
Global Context: Exclusionary Conservation Models
- Conservation laws globally are often exclusionary, marginalising Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs).
- Rooted in colonial ‘fortress conservation’ models, these laws create protected areas with centralised control.
- Such models have led to displacement of 10–20 million people globally by severing their ties to native lands.
Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology)
IPLCs as Natural Custodians
- Most biodiverse regions are where IPLCs have traditionally lived, governed, and nurtured ecosystems.
- Communities like the Masai, Ogiek, Batwa, Ashaninka, and Adivasis are time-tested custodians of biodiversity.
- Laws that recognise their tenure and traditional knowledge can improve conservation outcomes.
India’s Conservation Legal Frameworks
- India is a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and enacted the Biological Diversity Act (BDA), 2002.
- BDA established institutions like the National Biodiversity Authority and Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs).
- However, historical laws like the Wildlife Protection Act (1972) and Project Tiger (1973) used exclusionary models—displacing over 6 lakh people.
Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 – A Paradigm Shift
- FRA is a landmark legislation linking Adivasi rights with forest governance and conservation.
- It empowers gram sabhas (village councils) for democratic, decentralised management of forest resources.
- FRA recognises 13 types of rights, especially:
- Access to biodiversity and related knowledge.
- Right to protect, regenerate, conserve, or manage community forest resources.
International Support for IPLC Rights
- CBD’s Article 8(j) promotes traditional knowledge preservation.
- UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) affirms IPLC rights globally.
- India voted in favour of the declaration but avoids using the term “indigenous” domestically—asserts all Indians are indigenous.
Indian Constitutional and Legislative Support
- Scheduled Tribes are protected under Articles 244 & 244A.
- Laws like PESA (1996) and FRA (2006) enhance tribal self-governance and conservation roles.
Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), 2022
- KMGBF promotes equitable IPLC participation and includes “30 by 30” target (protecting 30% of land and marine ecosystems by 2030).
- While inclusive in theory, “30 by 30” risks expanding exclusionary protected areas unless implemented with IPLC safeguards.
India’s NBSAP (National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan), 2025
- Lists 23 biodiversity targets aligned with KMGBF, aiming for a bottom-up approach.
- In practice, the plan favours state-led models over community-led ones like FRA.
- BMCs are underdeveloped; synergy with gram sabhas remains weak.
OECMs – A New Opportunity or Threat?
- India to notify Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) soon.
- OECMs are meant to:
- Go beyond formal protected areas.
- Involve IPLCs or other stakeholders in conservation.
- Risk: Without legal clarity, OECMs might exploit biodiversity or traditional knowledge for corporate interests.
Need to Strengthen FRA in Practice
- FRA can safeguard 4 crore hectares of forest land.
- Other frameworks like BDA or CBD must align with FRA, not override it.
- Ministry of Tribal Affairs insists that:
- Rights under FRA be settled before any biodiversity sites are declared.
- Gram sabha consent be mandatory.
Key Takeaways
- India’s FRA offers a global model for inclusive, rights-based conservation.
- Recognition of community tenure + local governance = effective biodiversity conservation.
- Implementation gaps and overlapping legal frameworks need urgent policy synergy to avoid undermining tribal rights.
