Important topics and their relevance in UPSC CSE exam for March 5, 2024. If you missed the March 4, 2024 UPSC CSE exam key from the Indian Express, read it here

FRONT PAGE

SC: No immunity for MPs & MLAs who take bribe for vote, speech in House

Syllabus:

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

Mains Examination: 

• General Studies II: Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability

• General Studies IV: Probity in Governance: Challenges of corruption.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story- MEMBERS OF Parliament and state legislatures who take bribes to vote or speak in a certain manner in the House are not immune from prosecution, the Supreme Court said in a landmark order on Monday, overruling its 1998 judgment (JMM bribery case) which granted immunity to such lawmakers.

• What exactly Supreme Court said?

• What was the case?

• What was the 1998 ruling that the SC is referring to?

• Why was the court reconsidering the Narasimha case?

• For Your Information-In 1998, a five-judge bench in P.V. Narasimha Rao v State (CBI/SPE) interpreted these articles literally and held that legislators enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution for bribery in matters connected to their speech and votes in Parliament and Legislative Assemblies. The seven-judge bench that overruled this judgment was led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud. Arguments were heard over two days in the first week of October 2023.

An MLA from the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM), Sita Soren, was accused of accepting a bribe in return for her vote for a candidate during the 2012 Rajya Sabha elections. In 2014, the Jharkhand High Court refused to quash the case filed against her by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), leading to an appeal at the Supreme Court that same year.

A bench comprising then CJI Ranjan Gogoi, alongside Justices Abdul Nazeer and Sanjiv Khanna, heard the appeal in March 2019 and observed that the decision in P.V. Narasimha dealt directly with such cases. However, the bench took note of the fact that the case was decided by a narrow margin (a 3:2 split among the five judges) and stated that the issue was a matter of “substantial public importance”. As a result, they referred the matter to a larger bench.

In September 2023, a five-judge bench led by CJI Chandrachud demarcated three issues that needed to be reconsidered from the case and referred the case to a seven-judge bench. First, at a glance, the bench observed that the purpose of Articles 194(2) and 105(2) was to allow legislators to cast their votes without fear of reprisal, not to protect them from possible violations of criminal law.

Second, taking note of Justice S.C. Agarwal’s dissent in P.V. Narasimha, the decision in that case would seemingly protect bribe-takers who vote in accordance with the purpose of the bribe, and not those who act contrary to the purpose of the bribe. Last, relying on the same dissent, the bench observed that there is a need to decide if the offence of bribery is complete when the payment of the bribe is made or when the bribe is acted upon by the legislator.

• What were the arguments in favour of immunity for legislators?

• What were the arguments in favour of P.V. Narasimha being overruled?

• What Articles 105(2) and 194(2) of the Constitution says?

• For Your Information-The P V Narasimha Rao case refers to the 1993 JMM bribery case, in which Shibu Soren and some of his party MPs were accused of taking bribes to vote against the no-confidence motion against the then P V Narasimha Rao government. The Supreme Court had quashed the case against the JMM MPs, citing immunity under Article 105(2).

• What is the current case with the SC?

• What exactly Supreme Case recently in this regard?

• What are the provisions that grant legislators immunity from prosecution?

• Do You Know- Broadly, Article 105 of the Constitution deals with the “powers, privileges, etc. of the Houses of Parliament and of the members and committees thereof”.

Article 105(2) states, “No member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings.”

In a nutshell, this provision exempts MPs from any legal action for any statement made or act done in the course of their duties. For example, a defamation suit cannot be filed for a statement made in the House. Additionally, this immunity extends to certain non-members, like the Attorney General of India or a Minister who may not be a member but speaks in the House. In cases where a member oversteps or exceeds the contours of admissible free speech, the Speaker of the House will deal with it, as opposed to the court.

Meanwhile, Article 194(2) extends this immunity to MLAs and states, “No member of the Legislature of a State shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in the Legislature or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of a House of such a Legislature of any report, paper, votes, or proceedings.” In the present case, the court has to decide if the legal immunity enjoyed by parliamentarians extends to prosecution for demanding or taking a bribe.

• “Bribery is not protected by parliamentary privilege”-Explain

• What is “probity in public life”?

• What is Bribery and Corruption?

• What are the types of corruption?

• What are the reasons for corruption in India?

• Implication of corruption-Know in detail

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????When lawmakers take bribes

????Explained: Immunity of legislators from bribery charges

Poll bond details: Will comply, SBI tells SC, but need time until June 30

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Indian Polity and Governance

Main Examination: General Studies II: Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story– CALLING IT a “time consuming exercise”, the State Bank of India (SBI) on Monday asked the Supreme Court to extend the deadline for submitting details on purchase of electoral bonds to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to June 30. The Lok Sabha election process would be over by then.

• What was Supreme Court’s judgement regarding the same?

• First of all, what are electoral bonds?

• Why and when electoral bonds were introduced?

• Electoral Bonds-Key Features

• Which Bank is the only bank authorised to sell Electoral Bonds?

• “Holding the scheme “violative” of the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression and right to information, the court did not agree with the Centre’s contention that it was meant to bring about transparency and curb black money in political funding”- How it is “violative” of the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression and right to information?

• What orders does the court issue to the SBI, the authorized financial institution under the scheme?

• What SBI said?

• Supreme Court’s Verdict-In its two separate but unanimous verdicts spanning 232 pages, the court directed the SBI, the authorised financial institution under the scheme, to submit by March 6 the details of electoral bonds purchased since April 12, 2019 till date to the Election Commission which will publish the information on its official website by March 13. “SBI must disclose details of each electoral bond encashed by political parties which shall include the date of encashment and the denomination of the electoral bond,” the bench said. On April 12, 2019, the SC, in an interim order, had asked political parties to submit details of donations via electoral bonds to the EC in a sealed cover to be kept in the safe custody of the commission till further orders.

The SC also directed that electoral bonds which are within the validity period of 15 days but have not been encashed by political parties shall be returned by the political party or the purchaser — depending on who is in possession of the bond — to the issuing bank which shall refund the amount to the purchaser’s account.

The bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, struck down a set of amendments. “The Electoral Bond Scheme, the proviso to Section 29C(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (as amended by Section 137 of the Finance Act 2017); Section 182(3) of the Companies Act (as amended by Section 154 of the Finance Act 2017); and Section 13A(b) (of the Income Tax Act) (as amended by Section 11 of the Finance Act 2017) are violative of Article 19(1)(a) and unconstitutional,” the bench said.

It held that “the deletion of the proviso to Section 182(1) of the Companies Act, permitting unlimited corporate funding to political parties is arbitrary and violative of Article 14”. Section 29C of the RPA as amended by the Finance Act 2017 stipulated that the political party need not disclose financial contributions received through electoral bonds. Section 13A of the IT Act as amended said that the political party does not have to maintain a record of contributions received through electoral bonds. Section 182 of the Companies Act 2013 was amended by the Finance Act 2017 by which the earlier requirement of disclosure of particulars of the amount contributed by companies to political parties in their profit and loss accounts was deleted and donors were only required to disclose the amount contributed without disclosing particulars about the political party to which the contribution was made.

The court did not agree with the Centre’s submission that the political party which receives the contribution does not know of the identity of the contributor as neither the bond would have their name nor could the bank disclose such details to the party. The court argued that “de jure anonymity of the contributors does not translate to de facto anonymity.” Saying that the scheme is not fool-proof, the court said that there are “sufficient gaps” in the scheme which enable political parties to know who paid how much.

The government had argued that the scheme was intended to curb black money and ensure that contributions to parties flow through legitimate banking channels. But the bench held that the scheme does not satisfy the least restrictive test necessary for imposing curbs under Article 19(2) on the right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. “The purpose of curbing black money is not traceable to any of the grounds in Article 19(2)”.

The court added that the scheme “is not the only means for curbing black money in Electoral Financing” and “there are other alternatives which substantially fulfil the purpose and impact the right to information minimally when compared to the impact of electoral bonds on the right to information”. For contributions below Rs 20,000, electronic transfer is the “least restrictive” and “Electoral Trust” for amounts above that, it pointed out.

The bench held that “the right to informational privacy extends to financial contributions to political parties which is a facet of political affiliation” but added that “the Constitution does not establish a hierarchy between the right to information guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and the right to informational privacy to political affiliation, traceable to Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), 19(1)(c), and Article 21”.

The SC said, “we are unable to see how the disclosure of information about contributors to the political party to which the contribution is made would infringe political expression. .. Under the current Scheme, it is still open to the political party to coerce persons to contribute. Thus, the argument of the Union of India that the Electoral Bond Scheme protects the confidentiality of the contributor akin to the system of secret ballot is erroneous”.

On the amendment to Section 182 of the Companies Act permitting unlimited political contributions by companies as manifestly arbitrary, the SC said “the ability of a company to influence the electoral process through political contributions is much higher when compared to that of an individual.”

A company, the bench said, has a “much graver influence on the political process, both in terms of the quantum of money contributed to political parties and the purpose of making such contributions.” It added: “Contributions made by individuals has a degree of support or affiliation to a political association. However, contributions made by companies are purely business transactions, made with the intent of securing benefits in return. The amendment to Section 182 is manifestly arbitrary for treating political contributions by companies and individuals alike”.

The apex court said, “Companies before the amendment to Section 182 could only contribute a certain percentage of the net aggregate profits. The provision classified between loss-making companies and profit-making companies for the purpose of political contribution and for good reason.. the underlying principle of this distinction was that it is more plausible that law-making companies will contribute to political parties with a quid pro and not for the purpose of income tax benefits”. “The provision as amended by the Finance Act of 2017 does not recognise that the harm of contributions by loss-making companies in the form of quid pro quo is much higher. Thus the amendment…is manifestly arbitrary for not making a distinction between profit-making and loss-making companies for the purposes of political contribution”.

The court pointed out: “The purpose of Section 182 is to curb corruption and electoral financing. For instance, the purpose of banning a government company from contributing is to prevent such companies from entering the political fray. Amendment to Section 182 by permitting unlimited corporate contributions authorises unrestrained influence of companies in the electoral process. This is violative of the principle of free and fair elections and political equality captured in the value of one person, one vote.”

The verdict said financial contributions to political parties are usually made for two reasons — they may constitute an expression of support to the political party or the contribution may be based on a “quid pro quo”. “The huge political contributions made by corporations and companies should not be allowed to conceal the reason for financial contributions made by another section of the population: a student, a daily wage worker, an artist, or a teacher. When the law permits political contributions and such contributions could be made as an expression of political support which would indicate the political affiliation of a person, it is the duty of the Constitution to protect them,” it said.

In October last year, the bench began hearing arguments on the four petitions, including those filed by Congress leader Jaya Thakur, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR).

• What has the ECI’s stance been?

• What has the Centre’s stance been?

• What Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) data says about Electoral Bonds?

• Why are electoral bonds being so vehemently opposed by transparency activists?

• How popular are electoral bonds as a route of donation?

• What does the Supreme Court have to say on electoral bonds previously?

• What is the Election Commission’s stand on electoral bonds?

• Reserve Bank of India on electoral bonds scheme?

• Do you think that the Electoral Bond Scheme is arbitrary, unconstitutional and problematic?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????SC draws new red line: burden is on state to be ‘least restrictive’

????Money creates exclusionary impact on candidates, parties: SC

THE IDEAS PAGE

Why minerals are critical

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

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

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-The Ministry of Mines hosted two meetings with industry stakeholders in January to discuss opportunities for the mining of critical minerals by Indian companies in Sri Lanka and Australia. These meetings were organised in line with the ministry’s broader push to strengthen India’s critical minerals supply chain through the acquisition of overseas mineral assets.

• What do you understand by Critical minerals?

• Why is this resource critical?

• For Your Information- Critical minerals are minerals that are essential for economic development and national security, and the lack of availability of these minerals or the concentration of extraction or processing in a few geographical locations could potentially lead to “supply chain vulnerabilities and even disruption of supplies”. This is true for minerals such as lithium, graphite, cobalt, titanium, and rare earth elements, which are essential for the advancement of many sectors, including hightech electronics, telecommunications, transport, and defence.

One of the definitions cited in the report characterises a mineral as critical when the risk of supply shortage and associated impact on the economy is (relatively) higher than other raw materials. This definition of a critical mineral was first adopted in the US and the subsequent legislation that resulted from the analysis, the report said. The European Union also carried out a similar exercise and categorised critical minerals on the basis of two prerequisites: supply risk and economic importance.

Australia refers to critical minerals as: “metals, non-metals and minerals that are considered vital for the economic well-being of the world’s major and emerging economies, yet whose supply may be at risk due to geological scarcity, geopolitical issues, trade policy or other factors”.

• What is India’s position on critical minerals?

• “Mining of critical minerals by Indian companies in Sri Lanka and Australia”-discuss

• Do You Know-Sri Lanka holds significant reserves of vein graphite, a highly pure form of natural graphite that is only found on the island nation. Graphite is a critical mineral that is extensively used as the anode material in lithium-ion batteries. By weight, graphite is typically the largest component in lithium-ion batteries, with up to 70 kilograms of graphite used in an average electric vehicle (EV).

Graphite’s vital application in EVs explains the participation of Ola Electric in the ministry meeting. Ola has previously shown interest in entering the critical minerals supply chain by participating in the ministry’s ongoing first tranche of critical minerals auction. It had also attended a ministry meeting in October on opportunities in Zambia for the mining of copper, which is used as the cathode material in EV batteries.

India’s interest in Sri Lanka’s graphite coincides with the Sri Lankan government’s active pursuit of Indian companies for graphite mining in the country. “We have the best graphite in the world. Now, Indian companies will be manufacturing electric vehicles. One of the large components for electric batteries is graphite. We used to have about 30,000 graphite mines. So there’s a lot of opportunity with the expertise and the technology these Indian companies have, I think they should seriously look at Sri Lanka,” the Sri Lankan Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Tharaka Balasuriya said in an interview to ANI on February 22.

Graphite mining in Sri Lanka peaked during the two World Wars in the 20th century, hitting over 30,000 tonnes in annual exports. In 2023, however, the country only exported graphite weighing around 2,500 tonnes and valuing roughly $6 million. Sri Lanka has graphite reserves of around 1.3 million tonnes, as per data with the US Geological Survey.

Graphite in India is largely concentrated in Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, and Jharkhand, with these three states collectively accounting for 74 per cent of India’s graphite resources. However, only Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand, and Odisha have graphite reserves, which are measured resources that are economically viable to extract.

• Where are these critical mineral blocks, and what rights are being auctioned?

• What are the other clearances that will be required before operations begin?

• What are the estimated reserves of key critical minerals in these blocks?

• How does India currently get its supplies of these minerals?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????Experts Explain | What are the challenges India faces in assuring resilient critical minerals supply chains?

EXPLAINED

India’s ‘happy’ leopard story: what headline number does not show

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: General issues on Environmental ecology, Bio-diversity and Climate Change – that do not require subject specialization

Main Examination: General Studies III: Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-The results of the 2022 national survey released last week have come up with a leopard population of 13,874 (12,616-15,132). This is a gain of 75% from the 7,910 (6,566-9,181) estimated in 2014.

• ‘Recently Prime Minister Narendra hailed the significant increase in India’s leopard population, saying it is a testament to the country’s unwavering dedication to biodiversity’-what exactly 2022 national survey said?

• What the 2022 Status of Leopards in India report suggests about the big cat’s population estimates

• For Your Information-Indian leopards (Panthera pardus fusca) are distributed across a variety of forested habitats in India, Nepal, Bhutan, and parts of Pakistan. Being apex predators, they sit at the top of the food chain, and thus play a crucial role in maintaining a balanced ecosystem. Like lions (Panthera leo), leopards came to India from the west, most likely Ethiopia.

According to the recently released report, Central India and Eastern Ghats has the highest population of leopards (8,820), followed by the Western Ghats (3,596), and the Shivalik Hills and Gangetic Plains (1,109). Statewise, Madhya Pradesh boasts of the largest population of leopards (3,907), followed by Maharashtra (1,985), Karnataka (1,879) and Tamil Nadu (1,070).

“The data shows that the leopard population hasn’t grown the same way the tiger population has grown. It is a marginal increase,” Wildlife Institute of India’s (WII) former dean Y V Jhala told The Indian Express. However, he added that since leopards remain enticing targets for poachers, “it is a matter of satisfaction to manage the status quo”.

• What is the IUCN status of leopard?

• What are features of leopard?

• Know the difference between cheetah and Leopard and African cheetah and Asiatic cheetah

• Know the Difference between Extinct, Extinct in the Wild and Critically Endangered

• What is a carnivore food chain?

• What trophic level does the leopard inhabit in the food chain, and what is its ecological function?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????Cheetahs and others: know the 7 big cats

????13,874 leopards in India, Madhya Pradesh leads the pack

????What the 2022 Status of Leopards in India report suggests about the big cat’s population estimates

ECONOMY

India’s fuel exports to Europe recover in Feb; take longer route around Africa

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

Main Examination: General Studies II: Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests.

Key Points to Ponder:

• What’s the ongoing story-After plunging to the lowest level in a year-and-a-half in January due to the Red Sea troubles, India’s petroleum product exports to Europe registered a swift recovery in February, latest ship tracking data shows. Notably, even as some cargoes did take the seemingly perilous Red Sea route to Europe from ports on India’s west coast, the majority of the tankers took the much longer and costlier, albeit safer, route around Africa via the Cape of Good Hope.

• Does India export petrol to Europe?

• What is most exported from India to Europe?

• Which petroleum products are exported from India?

• For Your Information-India’s petroleum product exports to Europe in February jumped nearly 124 per cent from January levels to over 295,500 barrels per day (bpd), according to ship tracking data from commodity market analytics firm Kpler. Diesel exports to Europe trebled month-on-month to over 164,600 bpd, while jet fuel exports were 68.5 per cent higher at nearly 131,000 bpd. Europe’s share in India’s petroleum product exports was around 22 per cent in February, against just 12 per cent in January, but still substantially lower than last year’s export spree when 32 per cent of India’s product exports went to Europe. In January, European buyers appeared inclined towards buying fuels—mainly diesel—from the United States (US) instead of India due the Red Sea crisis. This was primarily because the alternative shipping route around Africa makes the voyage from India to Europe significantly longer, and considerably inflates freight costs as well. However, with supplies from the US hit due to weather-related disruptions and maintenance shutdowns, Europe evidently turned to India.

“Europe is in a way forced to look at Indian product imports again. European buyers have only started to buy US diesel instead of Indian/Middle Eastern…the cold snap in the US and then the heaviest maintenance schedule in years led to huge gaps in US diesel production, meaning US Gulf Coast refiners could no longer meet Europe’s demand needs. Consequently, India, firing on all cylinders with its own refining…was there to tap into,” said Viktor Katona, Lead Crude Analyst at Kpler. Of India’s petroleum product exports to Europe in February, nearly 170,500 bpd were shipped via the Cape of Good Hope route, while the rest took the Red Sea route. Prior to the Red Sea security crisis, tankers hauling fuels from India to Europe rarely opted for the longer route around the African continent.

“Commercially, the Cape of Good Hope (route) is still a suboptimal solution, but for Europe there are not that many options left with Russian diesel sanctioned and other suppliers producing less,” Katona said, adding that given the lucrative economics of the Red Sea trade route, some fuel importers in Europe now seem willing to opt for it despite the associated risks. As per trade sources, taking the Cape of Good Hope route instead of the Suez Canal raises the freight cost by roughly $1 million and adds 15-20 days to the voyage.

Over the past two-three months, a number of cargo ships have come under attack from the Iran-backed Houthi rebels of Yemen around the Bab el-Mandeb strait, which leads to the Red Sea and Suez Canal, forming the shortest, albeit narrow, route to the Mediterranean Sea and beyond from the Arab Peninsula, North-East Africa, and the Arabian Sea. The route is seen as an important artery of global goods and energy supplies. The Houthis have so far claimed that they are targetting vessels with links to Israel and its allies in view of its military offensive in Gaza.

India was traditionally not the biggest of fuel sources for Europe, with the continent depending heavily on Russia for energy imports. However, in the aftermath of Moscow’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, as Europe started shunning Russian crude oil and fuels, India emerged as the largest buyer of Russian seaborne crude and also a major fuel supplier to Europe with all such shipments passing through the Red Sea. Interestingly, the movement of Russian oil through the Suez Canal-Red Sea route has largely been immune to the prevailing crisis as Russia is perceived as Iran’s ally and the Houthi rebels appear to be backed by Tehran.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

????Red Sea Crisis: India’s petroleum exports to Europe nosedive to 18-month low in January

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