Important topics and their relevance in UPSC CSE exam for January 12, 2024. If you missed the January 10, 2024 UPSC CSE exam key from the Indian Express, read it here

THE WORLD

ICJ begins hearing SA’s genocide case against Israel as Gazans return to ruins

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

Main Examination: General Studies II: Important International institutions, agencies and fora- their structure, mandate.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-Israel faced accusations at the World Court on Thursday of genocide in its war in Gaza, as the first residents returned to northern areas where Israeli forces have begun withdrawing, leaving behind scenes of total devastation.

• Why Israel faced accusations at the World Court?

• Who brought the case at the International Court of Justice in the Hague and Why?

• What is the case before the World Court?

• What is UN’s 1948 Genocide Convention?

• Do You Know-South Africa brought a case against Israel to the ICJ on December 29, under UN’s 1948 Genocide Convention. In its application, South Africa argued that Israel, in its ongoing Gaza assault, has transgressed from the provisions of Article 2 of the Convention. This article defines the term “genocide” to mean “acts committed with intent to destroy, wholly or partly, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group”.

The ICJ will eventually decide whether Israel is committing genocide or not — this may take years. But first, it will decide whether it has jurisdiction on this matter, and whether the alleged acts fall under the 1948 Convention. South Africa has also sought interim relief for the Palestinians, and asked the ICJ to order Israel to immediately suspend all military operations in Gaza, as an interim measure. The court is likely to rule on this in a matter of weeks. While the court’s rulings are legally binding, it has no way to enforce them. Nonetheless, its opinions carry weight with the UN and other international institutions.

• What were South Africa’ arguments?

• How Israel responded?

• ‘During the opening arguments of South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the term ‘Amalek’ came up multiple times’—Who were the Amalek?

• Does the International Court of Justice have the power to prosecute Israel?

• Does Israel recognise International Court of Justice jurisdiction?

• What is International Court of Justice?

• International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice-Compare and Contrast

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????Everyday Global: What is the International Court of Justice

????AMALEK

????ICJ genocide case against Israel: What South Africa argued on Day 1

EXPLAINED

ACROSS THE SEA IN 20 MINUTES

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

Mains Examination: General Studies III: Infrastructure: Energy, Ports, Roads, Airports, Railways etc.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-On Friday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the country’s longest bridge over the sea, the 22 km Mumbai Trans Harbour Link, officially the Atal Setu Nhava Sheva Sea Link. The bridge that was first conceptualised six decades ago will cut the travel time between Sewri and Chirle to under 20 minutes.

• The Mumbai Trans Harbour Link (MTHL) or Atal Setu Nhava Sheva Sea Link-Know its features

• Atal Setu Nhava Sheva Sea Link-Why it is unique?

• For Your Information-The Mumbai Trans Harbour Link (MTHL) is a 22-km-long twin-carriageway six-lane bridge over the Thane Creek in the Arabian Sea, connecting Sewri in the island city of Mumbai to Chirle in Raigad district on the mainland. The MTHL includes a 16.5 km sea link and viaducts on land at either end with a cumulative length of 5.5 km.

The objective of the project is to improve connectivity in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region which comprises the districts of Mumbai, Thane, Palghar, and Raigad, and promote the region’s economic development. The MTHL will bring Mumbai and Navi Mumbai closer by dramatically cutting travel time, and will decongest the existing route over the Vashi bridge.

The idea of a bay crossing connecting Mumbai to the mainland was first floated in 1963 by the American construction consultancy firm Wilbur Smith Associates, but no follow-up action was initiated. The plan was revived in the late 90s, and the first tenders were floated in 2006.

In February 2008, Anil Ambani’s Reliance Infrastructure emerged as the preferred bidder after promising to build and recover the cost of building the (then) Rs 6,000 crore bridge in nine years and 11 months through a public private partnership (PPP) model.

Months later, however, Ambani withdrew from the project. Multiple unsuccessful bidding processes followed, and the nodal agency was changed from the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC) to the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA).

The project finally got moving after MMRDA entered into an agreement with Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which agreed to fund 80 per cent of the project cost, with the rest being borne by the state and central governments. The deal and tendering were finally completed in December 2017, and work commenced in early 2018. A total Rs 21,200 crore has been spent on the project, of which Rs 15,100 is loan from JICA.

• How Atal Setu Nhava Sheva Sea Link will help?

• Atal Setu Nhava Sheva Sea Link-What are the apprehensions, issues and challenges?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????India’s longest sea bridge opens today

Shinde faction is the real Shiv Sena: How Speaker came to this decision

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Indian Polity and Governance-Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues, etc.

Mains Examination: General Studies II: Parliament and State legislatures—structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers & privileges and issues arising out of these.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-In a setback to Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), the Maharashtra Assembly Speaker on Wednesday (January 10) declared that the faction led by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde was the “real Sena.” Rahul Narwekar also dismissed all 34 petitions seeking the disqualification of 54 MLAs belonging to the two rival factions.

• What was the Speaker deciding, and why?

• Which three factors did the Speaker consider to decide the issue?

• Why the 1999 constitution?

• What did Narwekar say about the leadership structure of the Shiv Sena?

• Why did the Speaker hold that Uddhav did not have power to expel Shinde from the party?

• What did Narwekar say about legislative majority?

• What did the Speaker say on the Shinde faction MLAs’ disqualification plea?

• Why were Uddhav Sena MLAs not disqualified?

• What next?

• What was the political setup in Maharashtra before the crisis?

• Why was there a political crisis in Maharashtra in 2022?

• What Supreme Court said exactly?

• Where did the Speaker differ with SC findings?

• Supreme Court’s Verdict- In its judgement, the Supreme Court said the “floor test cannot be used as a medium to resolve internal party disputes or intra party disputes” and noted that “dissent and disagreement within a political party must be resolved in accordance with the remedies prescribed under the party constitution, or through any other methods that the party chooses to opt for”. In its judgement, the Supreme Court said, “Ultimately, the decision of the Speaker on the question of disqualification is subject to judicial review.” It asked the Speaker to decide the disqualification petitions “within a reasonable period”. The court also rejected the contention of the Thackeray camp that the validity of the proceedings in the House during the pendency of the disqualification petitions would depend on the outcome of the disqualification petitions.

• Supreme Court on the role of the Governor-The SC said the power of the Governor to summon the House under Article 174 must be exercised on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. Doing so without the aid of the Council of Ministers “has ramifications on parliamentary democracy”, it said, adding that “the discretion to call for a floor test is not an unfettered discretion but one that must be exercised with circumspection, in accordance with the limits placed on it by law”. On the Governor’s role, it said, “…He cannot exercise a power that is not conferred on him by the Constitution or a law made under it. Neither the Constitution nor the laws enacted by Parliament provide for a mechanism by which disputes amongst members of a particular political party can be settled. They certainly do not empower the Governor to enter the political arena and play a role (however minute) either in inter-party disputes or in intra-party disputes.”

• Supreme Court on the role of the Speaker and appointment of Whip-“The Speaker must only recognise the whip appointed by the political party,” the Supreme Court said. Accordingly, it termed the decision of the Speaker (Rahul Narwekar) recognising Gogawale as the Chief Whip of the SSLP “illegal because the recognition was based on the resolution of a faction of the SSLP without undertaking an exercise to determine if it was the decision of the political party”. “The Speaker must recognise the Whip and the Leader who are duly authorised by the political party with reference to the provisions of the party constitution, after conducting an enquiry in this regard and in keeping with the principles discussed in this judgement,” it said. Writing for the bench, the CJI said, “The plain meaning of the provisions of the Tenth Schedule, 1986 Rules, and Maharashtra Legislature Members (Removal of Disqualification) Act of 1956 indicate that the Whip and the Leader must be appointed by the political party.” “The Tenth Schedule was introduced to thwart the growing tendency of legislators to shift allegiance to another political party after being elected on the ticket of a certain political party… When the anti-defection law seeks to curb defections from a political party, it is only a logical corollary to recognise that the power to appoint a Whip vests with the political party,” it said.

“To hold that it is the legislature party which appoints the Whip would be to sever the figurative umbilical cord which connects a member of the House to the political party. It would mean that legislators could rely on the political party for the purpose of setting them up for election, that their campaign would be based on the strengths (and weaknesses) of the political party and its promises and policies, that they could appeal to the voters on the basis of their affiliation with the party, but that they can later disconnect themselves entirely from that very party and be able to function as a group of MLAs which no longer owes even a hint of allegiance to the political party. This is not the system of governance that is envisaged by the Constitution. In fact, the Tenth Schedule guards against precisely this outcome. That a Whip be appointed by the political party is crucial for the sustenance of the Tenth Schedule….,” the Supreme Court said.

• Supreme Court on the Election Symbols-The Election Commission and the Speaker were empowered to concurrently adjudicate on the petitions before them under the Tenth Schedule and under Paragraph 15 of the Symbols Order – to decide who is the real Shiv Sena, respectively. “This is because the decision of the Speaker and the decision of the ECI are each based on different considerations and are taken for different purposes. The decision of the ECI has prospective effect(s). A declaration that one of the rival groups is that political party takes effect prospectively from the date of the decision,” the SC said. “In the event that members of the faction which has been awarded the symbol are disqualified from the House by the Speaker, the members of the group which continues to be in the House will have to follow the procedure prescribed in the Symbols Order and in any other relevant law(s) for the allotment of a fresh symbol to their group,” it said.

• What is a ‘floor test’?

• What do you understand by the term ‘collective responsibility’?

• What Article 164 of the constitution states?

• “Council of ministers is collectively responsible to the legislative assembly of the state”-What do you understand by this expression?

• What happens when the legislative assembly passes a no-confidence motion against the council of ministers?

• What is the difference between a no-confidence motion and trust vote?

• How Floor test and collective responsibility are interlinked?

• Governor can ask Government to prove majority in floor test-True or False

• What constitutes defection? Who is the deciding authority?

• What Supreme Court of India said in Kihoto Hollohan case (1993)?

• Has the anti-defection law ensured the stability of governments?

• Have any suggestions been made to improve the law?

• The 91st Amendment Act of 2003 made one change in the provisions of the Tenth Schedule. What was that?

• The disqualification of member on the ground of defection does not apply in the two exceptional cases. What is that ‘exception’?

• The five-judge Bench referred certain issues related to its 2016 judgment in the Nabam Rebia case to a larger Bench-Know in detail about the Nabam Rebia case

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????Sena vs Sena: Speaker says Shinde Sena ‘real party’, dismisses all pleas for disqualification

FRONT PAGE

Govt set to roll out vaccine drive to fight cervical cancer

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Economic and Social Development-Sustainable Development, Poverty, Inclusion, Demographics, Social Sector Initiatives, etc.

Mains Examination: General Studies II: Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-IN A significant step that can reduce the incidence of cervical cancer — the second most common cancer in women in India — the government is set to roll out a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination campaign for girls in the 9-14 years age group.

• What is human papillomavirus?

• Know about Cervical cancer

• What is the main cause of cervical cancer?

• How common is cervical cancer in India?

• Who developed the new qHPV vaccine?

• How effective is the new vaccine?

• Why cervical cancer is most common in India?

• How many types of HPV vaccines are there and who should get it?

• What is quadrivalent vaccine?

• WHO‘s Global Strategy to Accelerate the Elimination of Cervical Cancer 2030-Know in detail

• HPV vaccination and cervical cancer incidence in India-Know in detail

• Do You Know-INDIA ACCOUNTS for about a fifth of the world’s cervical cancer cases. With about 1.25 lakh new cases and 75,000 deaths each year, cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women in India, after breast cancer. About 83 per cent of invasive cervical cancer cases are attributed to HPV 16 or 18 in India.

The official explained that nearly 8 crore children between the ages of 9 and 14 years will be eligible for the vaccine across the country. When divided over three years, there will be at least 2.6 crore children eligible during the first year.

In addition to these 2.6 crore children, another 50 lakh to 1 crore children who will turn nine in the places where the campaign has already been rolled out will need the vaccine doses during the second and third year.

The immunisation drive will be conducted through schools and existing vaccination points. India accounts for about a fifth of the global burden for cervical cancer, recording about 1.25 lakh cases and about 75,000 deaths each year.

Persistent infections with certain high-risk HPV strains lead to nearly 85 per cent of all cervical cancers. At least 14 HPV types have been identified as oncogenic (potential to cause cancer). Among these, HPV types 16 and 18, considered to be the most oncogenic, have been found to be responsible for about 70 per cent of all cervical cancer cases globally.

While Cervavac, an indigenously developed quadrivalent vaccine by the Serum Institute of India (SII) in Pune, is already available commercially, the company is in the process of scaling up its manufacturing to meet government requirements. Cervavac offers protection against four HPV strains – 16, 18, 6 and 11.

“At present, SII has a production capacity of about 2-3 million doses of Cervavac per year. However, we intend to increase this capacity, with a target of 60-70 million doses,” said an SII spokesperson. “There has been a lot of learning from Covid-19. There is work going on to have a communication strategy in place and ensure any myths circulating online are promptly busted,” the spokesperson said.

Meanwhile, the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (NTAGI) has recommended that the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) conduct trials on the efficacy of a single-dose regimen of HPV vaccine in the age group of 9-15 years.

While none of the HPV vaccines available globally recommend a single-dose schedule, the World Health Organisation says that a single-dose regimen can be followed for public health programmes. According to the minutes of a meeting held last year, the ICMR said a Phase-3 single-dose trial to test efficacy would take a long time. A Phase-3 trial would mean waiting for several years to observe a certain number of cancer cases in the group that hasn’t been administered the vaccine. Instead, the ICMR study will look at antibody persistence after one dose of the vaccine.

• Drugs Controller General of India (DCGI)-Under which nodal Ministry or Independent body?

• For Your Information– India accounts for about a fifth of the global burden of cervical cancer, seeing 1.25 lakh cases and 75,000 deaths a year. The SII vaccine is quadrivalent, meaning it protects against the four most common strains of the virus known to cause cancers — HPV 16, 18, 6, and 11. Around 83 per cent of invasive cervical cancers are attributed to HPV 16 or 18 in India.

• The vaccine, Cervavac is a big step in preventive healthcare in the country-How?

• Why India needs to put more emphasis on preventive healthcare?

• National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (NTAGI)-Role, Powers and Functions

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????Cervavac, India’s first indigenously developed vaccine for cervical cancer: All you need to know

????A cervical cancer-free future: First-ever global commitment to eliminate a cancer

????Explained: What a new study has found on HPV vaccine, which protects against cervical cancer

EXPRESS NETWORK

SC to AMU: How would minority tag loss affect women’s studies

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Indian Polity and Governance-Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues, etc.

Mains Examination: General Studies II: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story– The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the submission that the lack of minority tag for Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) may hamper higher education of Muslim women in India, and pointed out that AMU has continued to be an institution of national importance even without the minority tag.

• What exactly Supreme Court said?

• “Lack of minority tag for Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) may hamper higher education of Muslim women in India”-What is your take on the same?

• What is the educational status of Muslim women in India?

• What are the problems of Muslim girls in higher education?

• What is the long-running legal dispute over Aligarh Muslim University’s minority character?

• Argument and Counter Argument in the Supreme Court-“Over the last 100 years, without the minority institution tag, it has continued to be an institution of national importance. How does it matter if we are not with you on Basha (judgment in S Azeez Basha vs Union of India), you started your address by saying that it would create great damage… How does it matter for the people whether it is a minority institution or not. It’s only the brand name AMU,” asked Justice Dipankar Datta, who is part of a seven-judge Constitution bench hearing a reference on the university’s minority status.

In 1967, the Supreme Court in the case S. Azeez Basha vs Union of India, had held that AMU was not entitled to minority educational institution status as it “was neither established nor administered by the Muslim minority”. The SC held that the university was brought into existence by the Central legislature and “not by the Muslim minority”. In the current reference, AMU and others have taken the stand that the bench should examine whether Basha judgment was correctly decided or not.

Justice Datta made the remarks as advocate Shadan Farasat — appearing for the Haji Muqeet Ali through his legal representative R Mustafa Muqeet, part of the local Muslim community at Aligarh — referred to the contribution of AMU towards Muslim women education and expressed apprehension that the lack of minority tag may adversely affect this.

“This university has served a very important purpose of creating an educated Muslim middle class… Education of Muslims and AMU go hand in hand… Students from Bengal, Kerala, Karnataka from Muslim families send their children only to AMU. Today there are exceptional universities all over the country… but the composition of AMU is from all over India, because of its minority status. Because that minority identity is relevant to a minority. That’s why we have Article 30 (which deals with the rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions). And this is especially true for women students because the burden of bearing the cultural markers of identity, be it a majority or be it a minority, always comes on the women.

When it comes to girl education, the existence of the minority status of AMU is very relevant, it’s a very important consideration in families sending their women to this institution… If the institution ceases to be a Muslim minority institution, it may very well hamper the higher education of Muslim women in India”, Farasat told the bench presided by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud.

Responding to Justice Datta’s remarks, Farasat said that till the Basha judgment, AMU was considered to be a minority institution and that due to the operation of a 2006 status quo order, it has continued to be a minority institution.

The bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant, J B Pardiwala, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma, is hearing the reference made to it by a three-judge bench in February 2019. The bench will resume hearing the matter on January 23.

• What is the entire issue?

• When did the university’s minority character come under dispute?

• “In January 2006, the Allahabad High Court had struck down amendments made to the AMU Act by which the university was accorded the minority status”-Know in detail

• S Azeez Basha vs Union of India case of 1967-Know in detail

• For Your Information-In S Azeez Basha vs Union of India case of 1967, a five-judge Constitution bench of the apex court held that AMU was not entitled to minority education status as it “was neither established nor administered by the Muslim minority”. The apex court held that the university was brought into existence by the Central legislature and “not by the Muslim minority”.

The minority status was restored by an amendment to the AMU Act in 1981, but this was challenged before the Allahabad High Court, which struck down the changes in January 2006. On the change of stand, the Centre submitted that “the request for withdrawal is based on the original stand taken by the Union of India” and alleged that AMU was trying to give it a political colour.

• What is the ‘minority character’ of an educational institution?

• When and how was AMU set up?

• Do You Know- AMU’s origins can be traced back to the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental (MOA) College, established by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan in 1875 to help Muslims overcome educational backwardness and prepare for government services. MOA not only imparted Western education but also emphasised Islamic theology. Sir Syed also advocated for women’s education.

In 1920, the institution was conferred university status and all assets of MOA College were transferred to it. The long title to the AMU Act read: “An Act to incorporate a teaching and residential Muslim University at Aligarh.” The legal dispute over AMU’s minority status dates back to 1967 when the Supreme Court (in S. Azeez Basha and another versus Union of India), led by then Chief Justice of India KN Wanchoo, was reviewing changes made in 1951 and 1965 to the AMU Act of 1920. These amendments affected how the university was run. For instance, originally, the 1920 Act said that the Governor General of India would be the head of the University. But in 1951, they changed it to replace ‘Lord Rector’ with ‘Visitor,’ and this Visitor would be the President of India.

Further, a provision that said only Muslims could be part of the University Court was removed, allowing non-Muslims to join. Additionally, the amendments reduced the authority of the University Court and increased the powers of the Executive Council of AMU. As a result, the Court essentially became a body appointed by the ‘Visitor’.

These alterations in the AMU’s structure faced a legal challenge in the Supreme Court. The petitioners argued primarily on the grounds that Muslims established AMU and, therefore, had the right to manage it. It was while considering the challenge to these amendments that the top court held on October 20, 1967, that AMU was neither established nor administered by the Muslim minority.

The highest court determined that in 1920, Muslims could have set up a university, but that would not have guaranteed that the degrees from that university would be officially recognised by the Indian government. Hence, the court emphasised, AMU was established through a central Act to ensure the government’s recognition of its degrees. So while the Act may have been passed as a result of the efforts of the Muslim minority, it does not imply that the University, under the 1920 Act, was established by the Muslim minority, the SC ruled.

Additionally, according to the 1920 Act, the SC stated, the university was not solely operated by Muslims. Instead, its administration was entrusted to the Lord Rector and other statutory bodies. Even the University Court, which had only Muslim members, was elected by an electorate which was not exclusively Muslim, the Supreme Court noted.

• Why does the dispute persist?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????The long-running legal dispute over the minority character of AMU

THE IDEAS PAGE

Open up the playing field

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

Mains Examination: General Studies II: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-Mansi Kedia, Rohit Prasad Writes: The Telecommunication Act 2023, replaces the hoary Telegraph Act 1885 and the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1933. Through these years, as technology evolved, service providers entered and exited, and communications changed from voice to data, the Telegraph Act stood tall, albeit through a series of amendments and intermittent policy reforms.

• What Telecommunication Act 2023 says about internet communication service?

• Telecommunication Act 2023-Know the highlights

• Know about the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933, and The Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Protection) Act, 1950

• How these three acts (the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933, and The Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Protection) Act, 1950) governs the telecommunication sector in India?

• “The life span of this new Act may not be as long”-Comment

• The Act has introduced several vital changes-What are those changes?

• “On 5G, India, like most other countries, is stuck in a vicious cycle of unattractive use cases, poor monetisation and underinvestment in infrastructure”-Discuss

• Telecommunications Bill, 2023-What this bill says about spectrum allocation?

• ‘The big debate over allocation and auction of spectrum, and overhang of the 2012 SC ruling’-What you know so far?

• What was the Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling in the 2G case?

• How Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling in the 2G case will impact spectrum allocation now?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????Telecommunications Bill, 2023: The changes it seeks in the telecom sector, why some have raised concerns

????Telecom Bill 2023: What powers it gives the government for ‘national security’

For any queries and feedback, contact priya.shukla@indianexpress.com The Indian Express UPSC Hub is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with the latest Updates.

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.