1) For the weakest: On sub-classification among SCs-
GS 2- Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability
CONTEXT:
- The Supreme Court has given cogent(convincing) reasons for a reconsideration of the verdict given by a five-judge Bench in 2004.
- 2004 order stated that State legislatures have no power to create sub-classifications among the list of Scheduled Castes notified by the President.
NO TRICKLE DOWN:
- A five-judge Bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra has affirmed the competence of the States to give preferential treatment to the weakest among the Scheduled Castes without depriving other castes of any benefit.
- The Court has noted that the SC list contains many castes and cannot be treated as a homogeneous group.
- It has recognised the obligation of States to identify for preferential treatment those sections within the SC communities to whom reservation benefits had not trickled down, and were in the same state of backwardness for decades.
- The Bench has disagreed with the formulation in E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2004) that classifying Scheduled Castes into groups amounts to ‘tinkering(changing)’ with the Presidential list.
- Also, the Constitution has been amended in 2018 to introduce Article 342A under which the President notifies, in consultation with the States, the list of Backward Classes.
- A caveat similar to the ones in respect of SC(A 341) and ST(A 342) that Parliament can make inclusions or exclusions in this list, and that once such a change is notified, “it shall not be varied by any subsequent notification”.
- What is the effect of this? The Court says it could mean that just as the BC list can be divided into ‘backward’ and ‘more backward’, the same could be done among SCs too.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION:
- As E.V. Chinnaiah is also a verdict by a Bench with a strength of five, the matter has been referred to a larger Bench.
- If the judgment is reconsidered, it would provide welcome relief to States that wish to fulfil their obligation to the castes within the SC communities that have made the least progress.
- In the present case, the affected State was Punjab, which wanted to give preference to Balmikies and Mazhabi Sikhs among seats reserved for SC candidates. This measure was struck down by the HC, citing E.V. Chinnaiah.
- Tamil Nadu has also carved out 3% compartment for Arundhatiyars within the 18% SC quota.
- Such affirmative action programmes will be protected if a larger Bench overturns the Chinnaiah formulation. However, the outcome may not be an unmixed blessing for Dalits at large.
- Recent jurisprudence is veering towards the view that the ‘creamy layer’ concept should be applied to SC/ST candidates too.
- Given the oppression and marginalisation(seclusion) Dalits continue to face, it is a moot question whether this is the appropriate time to begin excluding some of them on the ground that they are better off than the rest of the community.
- The concern should be less about the ‘creamy layer’ occupying posts under SC quota and more about ensuring adequate representation to the most marginalised among Dalits.
CONCLUSION:
Revisiting bar on States giving preference to the most marginalised among SCs is welcome.
2) Alone at the top: On India’s COVID-19 numbers-
GS 2- Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health
CONTEXT:
- For most of this month, India has consistently been contributing the most number of daily confirmed COVID-19 infections to the world.
- This week, it reported 78,508 infections on a single day — a record single day spike — that has pushed the infection tally to over 3.6 million.
LOW CFR:
- In March, when the epidemic was yet to take hold in the country, there was the belief that it could be vanquished(disappeared).
- In those days, projections based on epidemiological modelling which indicated that millions would be infected were met with denial by the government as well as disbelief by many, especially because of how it had pulverised(destroyed) medical health systems in Europe and the United States.
- The dominant note in the government’s narrative on how it has handled the pandemic is that it has kept India’s death rate low. India’s confirmed case fatality rate (CFR) is below 2% — totalling to over 64,500 deaths.
- The U.S. and Brazil, the only two countries with more cases than India, have a CFR of around 3% and a good number of countries that lead the COVID-19 tally have their confirmed deaths in that region.
- Were India too to have a similar death rate, that would work out to 103,000 deaths.
- Whether the nearly 40,000 averted(prevented) deaths are so far evidence of a dodged bullet, or in part due to an undercount that results from States not reporting ‘suspected or probable deaths’ (as required by ICMR guidelines) and not medically certifying all deaths can only be known by more data being made available in the future for analysis.
PRESENCE IN DEEP ROOTS:
- That the virus has managed to infect some of India’s most secluded(isolated) tribes in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands is a pointer that it has now set deep roots within the country along with several other bacteria and viruses that thrive in India’s tropical climate.
- Its invincibility has contributed to the widespread adoption of face covers and masks and the vital role of maintaining hygiene and avoiding crowds.
- These are welcome behavioural changes that will serve well in the future when India will continue to grapple with seasonal outbreaks and epidemics of influenza, dengue as well as its old scourge of TB.
- The health-care system being pushed to its breaking point has also underlined the country’s historical neglect of widespread affordable health care as well as the paucity(lack) of qualified personnel to treat the poor.
- In spite of the availability of sophisticated labs and expert scientists and doctors, India continues to struggle to develop indigenous testing kits as well as conduct well-designed trials to check for the efficacy of drugs that might help with the infection.
- There must be deep reckoning to fix gaps in the manufacturing and product delivery chain to put in place new habits and erect a stronger line of defence against future blights.
CONCLUSION:
The gaps in India’s health care exposed by the pandemic must be closed quickly.
3) Despite the messaging, it is still advantage China-
GS 2- Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation
CONTEXT:
Many U.S. companies as well as the analysts who advise them are cognizant(aware) of India’s goal of becoming an alternative supply source and investment destination to China.
WILL REMAIN LIKELY:
- First, despite media reports and strong messaging from Washington, fewer U.S. companies than predicted might quit the People’s Republic of China.
- Companies focused on the Chinese domestic market rather than as a base for exports will likely remain, at least for now.
- Those that do leave may not choose India as a relocation destination.
- Despite India’s noted success in attracting Apple suppliers to India, many U.S. companies with experience working with China are not convinced that India has the PRC’s established industrial base and expertise.
- They also see other Asian countries as more competitive.
- To change their minds, these sceptics(one who doubts) must be convinced that India offers the benefits of China with fewer risks.
THE GOOD AND BAD POINTS:
- To be sure, India’s identity as a democratic “un-China” is one of its strongest selling points. There are no Indian government hackers stealing foreign companies’ industrial secrets.
- India’s open and vibrant press, independent judiciary, and other advantages of democratic governance also provide a favourable contrast to China.
- Yet, India might appear more like China to potential foreign investors than New Delhi might think, particularly given policies that seemingly disadvantage foreign investors who pose the greatest competitive threat to India’s domestic counterparts.
- To be clear, India’s goal of creating national champions is not necessarily anti-competitive in itself.
- But when policies such as taxes on foreign e-commerce companies and education providers seem constructed to disadvantage foreign investors, investors will stay away.
- India’s large and increasingly well-off domestic market, while alluring(attractive), will likely not convince foreign companies to accept limits and conditions they might not accept elsewhere.
- Although early foreign investors in China endured years of losses caused by disadvantageous PRC policies, today’s shareholders demand more accountability and faster profit-making from companies in which they are invested.
- There are also now many more competitor investment destinations, both within and outside of Asia.
WHY CHINA SCORES:
- China continues to offer investors many advantages, such as a manufacturing infrastructure and skill level that allows innovations to move quickly from prototype to product.
- This took decades of strategic planning.
- India’s own planning has been impressively stepped up in recent months, with the government identifying key sectors; surveying major companies about perceived roadblocks to Indian investments; and increasing Invest India’s outreach.
- But more is needed. For example, China’s specialised industrial zones are massive, collocating companies, factories, logistics, and even research and universities.
- The Indian government Budget that pledged to create equivalent zones is too small and is allocated among too many locations to compete.
FOCUS ON STATES:
- The recent World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute panel ruling against India’s special economic zones policies, which the Indian government intends to appeal, might actually provide a chance to take a fresh look at the kinds of WTO-consistent industrial bases that are possible.
- New Delhi can start by focusing development in those Indian States that have already demonstrated the ability to produce and export in key sectors.
- Foreign capital could also greatly increase infrastructure funds beyond government spending alone.
- India might also usefully build up new industrial centres with an eye to geography, for example linking the southeast of the country to supply chains in Southeast Asia.
- In fact, by putting resources into States not led by the ruling national party, India will signal clearly that it is committed to economic openness, no matter who is in power, reassuring investors.
CONCLUSION:
- India has taken a great step to reduce the number of investments needing approval by the Centre, and to increase intra-Ministry coordination on foreign direct investment policies.
- The same coordination could usefully be extended to the appointment of a high-level official or body in the Prime Minister’s Office to ensure any and all proposed economic policy changes are consistent with the goal of attracting foreign investment.
- A policy framework that is transparent, predictable, and provides increased consultations with existing and potential foreign company stakeholders before introducing new Indian economic policies, will play a crucial role in determining India’s foreign investment outlook.