CURRENT AFFAIRS 5 OCTOBER 2019

CURRENT AFFAIRS 

5 OCTOBER 2019

BY SUMIT 

1.United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations(gs-2,3)

• Context: In a first, U.S. lawmakers take a step against India on Kashmir.
• In what could become the first step towards legislative action by American lawmakers against India on the situation in Jammu and Kashmir, the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations has added an appeal to end what it calls a “humanitarian crisis” in Kashmir in its report ahead of the annual Foreign Appropriations Act for 2020.
• The amendment was proposed by Senator Chris Van Hollen, who visited Delhi this week as a part of a congressional delegation that discussed the Kashmir situation as well as India-U.S. bilateral relations, trade ties and defence purchases with key officials.

United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations:

• The United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations is a standing committee of the United States Senate. It is charged with leading foreign-policy legislation and debate in the Senate. 
• The Foreign Relations Committee is generally responsible for overseeing (but not administering) and funding foreign aid programs as well as funding arms sales and training for national allies. 
• The committee is also responsible for holding confirmation hearings for high-level positions in the Department of State. The committee has considered, debated, and reported important treaties and legislation, ranging from the Alaska purchase in 1867 to the establishment of the United Nations in 1945. 
• It also holds jurisdiction over all diplomatic nominations. Along with the Finance and Judiciary Committees, the Foreign Relations Committee is one of the oldest in the Senate, going back to the initial creation of committees in 1816. Its sister committee in the House of Representatives is the Committee on Foreign Affairs (renamed from International Relations by the 110th Congress in January 2007)

2.LOKPAL(GS-2)

CONTEXT:Lokpal receives 1,065 complaints, disposes of almost all

• The anti-corruption ombudsman became functional after appointment of its chairperson and eight members in March
• Lokpal, the apex anti-corruption ombudsman that became functional after the appointment of its chairperson and eight members in March, has heard and disposed of 1,000 of the 1,065 complaints received till September 30.
• “Although the form for filing complaint has not yet been notified, Lokpal decided to scrutinise all the complaints received in the office, in whatever form they were sent,” said the authority on its website.
• As recommended by the Selection Committee, under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, the President appointed the Lokpal chairperson and eight members (including four from the judicial side) on March 19.
• Justice (retired) Pinaki Chandra Ghose took charge as the first Lokpal chairman on March 23, following which the members joined on March 27.
• The Lokpal has jurisdiction to inquire into corruption allegations against anyone who is, or has been, Prime Minister, or a Minister in the Central government, or an MP and Central government officials.
• Chairpersons, members, functionaries and directors of any organisation set up under a law passed by Parliament, or wholly/partly funded by the Central or State government, are also covered, apart from the registered bodies that receive foreign contribution above RS 10 lakh.

What are Lokpal and Lokayukta?

• The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013 provided for the establishment of Lokpal for the Union and Lokayukta for States.
• These institutions are statutory bodies without any constitutional status.
• They perform the function of an "ombudsman” and inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries and for related matters.

Why do we need such institutions?

• Maladministration is like a termite which slowly erodes the foundation of a nation and hinders administration from completing its task. Corruption is the root cause of this problem.
• Most of the anti-corruption agencies are hardly independent. Even Supreme Court has been termed CBI as a “caged parrot” and “its master’s voice”.
• Many of these agencies are advisory bodies without any effective powers and their advice is rarely followed.
• There is also the problem of internal transparency and accountability. Moreover, there is not any separate and effective mechanism to put checks on these agencies.
• In this context, an independent institution of Lokpal has been a landmark move in the history of Indian polity which offered a solution to the never-ending menace of corruption.

Background

• In 1809, the institution of ombudsman was inaugurated officially in Sweden.
• In the 20th century, Ombudsman as an institution developed and grew most significantly after the Second World War.
• New Zealand and Norway adopted this system in the year 1962 and it proved to be of great significance in spreading the concept of the ombudsman.
• In 1967, on the recommendations of the Whyatt Report of 1961, Great Britain adopted the institution of the ombudsman and became the first large nation in the democratic world to have such a system.
• In 1966, Guyana became the first developing nation to adopt the concept of the ombudsman. Subsequently, it was further adopted by Mauritius, Singapore, Malaysia, and India as well.
• In India, the concept of constitutional ombudsman was first proposed by the then law minister Ashok Kumar Sen in parliament in the early 1960s.
• The term Lokpal and Lokayukta were coined by Dr. L. M. Singhvi.
• In 1966, the First Administrative Reforms Commission recommended the setting up of two independent authorities- at the central and state level, to look into complaints against public functionaries, including MPs.
• In 1968, Lokpal bill was passed in Lok Sabha but lapsed with the dissolution of Lok Sabha and since then it has lapsed in the Lok Sabha many times.
• Till 2011 eight attempts were made to pass the Bill, but all met with failure.
• In 2002, the Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution headed by M.N. Venkatachaliah recommended the appointment of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas; also recommended that the PM be kept out of the ambit of the authority.
• In 2005, the Second Administrative Reforms Commission chaired by Veerappa Moily recommended that the office of Lokpal should be established without delay.
• In 2011, the government formed a Group of Ministers, chaired by Pranab Mukherjee to suggest measures to tackle corruption and examine the proposal of a Lokpal Bill.
• "India Against Corruption movement" led by Anna Hazare put pressure on the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government at the Centre and resulted in the passing of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2013, in both the Houses of Parliament.
• It received assent from President on 1 January 2014 and came into force on 16 January 2014.

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas (Amendment) Bill, 2016

• This Bill was passed by Parliament in July 2016 and amended the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013.
• It enables the leader of the single largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha to be a member of the selection committee in the absence of a recognized Leader of Opposition.
• It also amended section 44 of the 2013 Act that deals with the provision of furnishing of details of assets and liabilities of public servants within 30 days of joining the government service.
• The Bill replaces the time limit of 30 days, now the public servants will make a declaration of their assets and liabilities in the form and manner as prescribed by the government.
• It also gives an extension of the time given to trustees and board members to declare their assets and those of their spouses in case of these are receiving government funds of more than Rs. 1 crore or foreign funding of more than Rs. 10 lakh.

Structure of Lokpal

Lokpal is a multi-member body, that consists of one chairperson and a maximum of 8 members.

• Chairperson of the Lokpal should be either the former Chief Justice of India or the former Judge of Supreme Court or an eminent person with impeccable integrity and outstanding ability, having special knowledge and expertise of minimum 25 years in the matters relating to anti-corruption policy, public administration, vigilance, finance including insurance and banking, law and management.
• Out of the maximum eight members, half will be judicial members and minimum 50% of the Members will be from SC/ ST/ OBC/ Minorities and women.
• The judicial member of the Lokpal either a former Judge of the Supreme Court or a former Chief Justice of a High Court.
• The non-judicial member should be an eminent person with impeccable integrity and outstanding ability, having special knowledge and expertise of minimum 25 years in the matters relating to anti-corruption policy, public administration, vigilance, finance including insurance and banking, law and management.
• The term of office for Lokpal Chairman and Members is 5 years or till the age of 70 years.
• The members are appointed by the president on the recommendation of a Selection Committee.
• The selection committee is composed of the Prime Minister who is the Chairperson; Speaker of Lok Sabha, Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha,  Chief Justice of India or a Judge nominated by him/her and One eminent jurist.
• For selecting the chairperson and the members, the selection committee constitutes a search panel of at least eight persons.

Lokpal Search Committee

• Under the Lokpal Act of 2013, the DoPT is supposed to put together a list of candidates interested to be the chairperson or members of the Lokpal.
• This list would then go to the proposed eight-member search committee, which would shortlist names and place them before the selection panel headed by the Prime Minister.
• The selection panel may or may not pick names suggested by the search committee.
• In September 2018, the government had constituted a search committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai.
• The 2013 Act also provides that all states should set up the office of the Lokayukta within one year from the commencement of the Act.

Lokpal Jurisdiction and Powers

• Jurisdiction of Lokpal includes Prime Minister, Ministers, members of Parliament, Groups A, B, C and D officers and officials of Central Government.
• Jurisdiction of the Lokpal included the Prime Minister except on allegations of corruption relating to international relations, security, the public order, atomic energy and space.
• The Lokpal does not have jurisdiction over Ministers and MPs in the matter of anything said in Parliament or a vote given there.
• Its jurisdiction also includes any person who is or has been in charge (director/ manager/ secretary) of anybody/ society set up by central act or any other body financed/ controlled by central government and any other person involved in act of abetting, bribe giving or bribe taking.
• The Lokpal Act mandates that all public officials should furnish the assets and liabilities of themselves as well as their respective dependents.
• It has the powers to superintendence over, and to give direction to CBI.
• If Lokpal has referred a case to CBI, the investigating officer in such case cannot be transferred without the approval of Lokpal.
• The Inquiry Wing of the Lokpal has been vested with the powers of a civil court.
• Lokpal has powers of confiscation of assets, proceeds, receipts and benefits arisen or procured by means of corruption in special circumstances.
• Lokpal has the power to recommend transfer or suspension of public servant connected with allegation of corruption.
• Lokpal has the power to give directions to prevent the destruction of records during the preliminary inquiry.

Limitations

• The institution of lokpal has tried to bring a much needed change in the battle against corruption in the administrative structure of India but at the same time, there are loopholes and lacunae which need to be corrected.
• Five years have passed since the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act 2013 was passed by parliament, but not a single Lokpal has been appointed till date indicating the lack of political will.
• The Lokpal act also called upon states to appoint a Lokayukta within a year of its coming to force. But only 16 states have established the Lokayukta.
• Lokpal is not free from political influence as the appointing committee itself consist of members from political parties.
• The appointment of Lokpal can be manipulated in a way as there is no criterion to decide who is an ‘eminent jurist’ or ‘a person of integrity.’
• The 2013 act did not provide concrete immunity to the whistle blowers. The provision for initiation of inquiry against the complainant if the accused is found innocent will only discourage people from complaining.
• The biggest lacuna is the exclusion of judiciary from the ambit of the Lokpal.
• The Lokpal is not given any constitutional backing and there is no adequate provision for appeal against the Lokpal.
• The specific details in relation to the appointment of Lokayukta have been left completely on the States.
• To some extent, the need for functional independence of the CBI has been catered to by a change brought forth in the selection process of its Director, by this Act.
• The complaint against corruption cannot be registered after a period of seven years from the date on which the offence mentioned in such complaint is alleged to have been committed.

3.REPO RATE(GS-3)

• CONTEXT: RBI’s 25-bps rate cut leaves market disappointed
• The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) delivered another rate cut on Friday — the fifth in as many policy review meetings to boost a slowing economy. However, the move failed to cheer the market which was betting on a bigger rate reduction.

• The central bank also revised its growth forecast for the current financial sharply, from 6.9% projected in the August policy, to 6.1%. Growth forecast for the first quarter of the next financial year was also trimmed to 7.2% from 7.4%.
• Inflation forecast for the second half of FY20 has been retained at 3.5-3.7%.
• The market was clearly disappointed as it was expecting a bigger rate cut. Equity indices ended in the red with the Sensex shedding over 434 points or 1.14%, led by a fall in financial sector stocks.

Reserve Bank of India formulates and administers monetary policies specifically for the purpose of controlling the supply of money in the economy to stimulate various aspects of economic growth. The primary objective of such monetary policies are promoting economic development through price stability, regulation of the volume of bank credits, improving efficiency of the financial system, promoting investments and increasing diversification in financial markets. In this context, repo rate and reverse repo rate are instruments of RBI’s monetary policy that can help control the money supply in the economy.

What are Repo Rate and Reverse Repo Rate?

• Repo Rate: The term ‘Repo’ stands for ‘Repurchase agreement’. Repo is a form of short-term, collateral-backed borrowing instrument and the interest rate charged for such borrowings is termed as repo rate. In India, repo rate is the rate at which Reserve Bank of India lends money to commercial banks in India if they face a scarcity of funds. Commercial banks sell government securities and bonds to Reserve Bank of India with an agreement to repurchase the securities and bonds from Reserve Bank of India on a future date at a pre-determined price including interest charges. 

• Reverse Repo Rate: Reverse repo as the name suggests is an opposite contract to the Repo Rate. Reverse Repo rate is the rate at which the Reserve Bank of India borrows funds from the commercial banks in the country. In other words, it is the rate at which commercial banks in India park their excess money with Reserve Bank of India usually for a short-term. 

How do Repo and Reverse Repo Rates Differ?

The following are the key differences between repo and reverse repo in India:

Comparison Criteria	Repo Rate	Reverse Repo Rate
Lender and Borrower	Lender – RBI, Borrower – Commercial Banks.	Lender – Commercial Banks, Borrower – RBI.
Borrower’s Objective	To manage short term deficiency of funds	To reduce overall supply of money in the economy
Rate of Interest	Higher than reverse repo rate	Lower than repo rate
Interest Charge Applicable to	Repurchase Agreement	Reverse Repurchase Agreement
Mechanism of Operation	Commercial banks get funds from RBI using government bonds as collateral.	Commercial banks deposit their excess funds with RBI and receive interest from the deposit.
Impact of Higher Rate	Cost of funds increases for commercial banks hence loans become more expensive.	Money supply in the economy decreases as commercial banks park more surplus funds with RBI.
Impact of Lower Rate	Cost of funds is lower for commercial banks leading to reduced interest rates on loans.	Money supply in the economy increases as banks lend more and reduce their deposits with RBI.

4.NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR(NSA)(GS-2,3)

CONTEXT: Peace is of utmost importance, says NSA Ajit Doval

India is willing to work for peace and growth in the neighbourhood on a “non-reciprocal basis and assume the responsibilities befitting its size and the advantages that it has got” said National Security Adviser Ajit Doval on Friday.

The National Security Advisor (NSA) 

• The National Security Advisor (NSA) is the senior official on the National Security Council (NSC) of India, and the chief Advisor to the Prime Minister of India on national and international security policy. Ajit Doval is the current NSA.
• The post has high vested powers, so the NSA is a highly prominent and powerful office in the Government of India. All NSAs appointed since the inception of the post in 1998 belong to the either Indian Foreign Service or to the Indian Police Service, and serve at the discretion of the Prime Minister of India.
• The National Security Advisor (NSA) is tasked with regularly advising the Prime Minister of India on all matters relating to internal and external threats and opportunities to India, and oversees strategic and sensitive issues on behalf of the Prime Minister. The NSA of India also serves as the Prime Minister's Special Interlocutor with China as well as the envoy to Pakistan and Israel on security affairs. He can be seen frequently accompanying the Prime Minister on official and State visits.
• The NSA receives all intelligence reports and co-ordinates them to present before the Prime Minister. NSA is assisted by the Deputy National Security Advisors, Deputy NSAs. Retired Indian Police Service officer Rajinder Khanna and Indian Foreign Service officer Pankaj Saran currently serve as Deputy National Security Advisors.The policy group is the main mechanism for inter-ministerial coordination and integration of inputs in forming national security policies. The group members include the NITI Aayog vice chairman, the cabinet secretary, the three military chiefs, the Reserve Bank of India governor, the foreign secretary, home secretary, finance secretary and the defense secretary.
• Brajesh Mishra was appointed the first National Security Advisor of India. The post was created on 19 November 1998 by the Government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and has become increasingly influential and powerful over the years with the rise of India on the world stage

5.HATE CRIMES(GS-1,3)

CONTEXT:Amnesty report: Hate crimes rose sharply the first half of 2019

• Tracker records 181; Dalits are most victimised; highest number of cases in U.P.
• Amnesty India’s hate crime tracker has recorded 181 incidents of alleged hate crimes in the first half of 2019, the steepest rise in such incidents since 2015. The count is almost double that of the same period last year, when 100 such cases were recorded.
• Over two-thirds of the victims were targeted because because they were Dalits, while 40 of them suffered on account of their Muslim identity. In 37 reported incidents, the victims were killed. In 30 cases, victims were raped or sexually assaulted, with sexual harassment in another 19 cases
• The tracker works by collating information from reports in English and Hindi language media. It classifies hate crimes on the basis of alleged motives, types of targeted victims and level of violence. Official government data is not available, as Indian law does not recognise a hate crime as a separate offence.

Why in news?

India’s hate crime tracker has recorded 181 incidents of alleged hate crimes in the first half of 2019, the steepest rise in such incidents since 2015.……ACCORDING TO Amnesty India..

What is the reaction to the crimes?

Domestically - There have been a number of editorials, OpEds and talk shows calling for action.

Internationally - India has begun to feature prominently on a growing list of countries marked by hate crime.

Why in news?

The first week of the second term of the present government has been marked by more hate crimes in Jharkhand, Tripura, Rajasthan, etc.

Amnesty report: Hate crimes rose sharply the first half of 2019

Amnesty International India - Documented 721 hate crime incidents between 2015 and 2018, with 218 incidents last year alone.The more common hate crimes were honour killings and then cow-related violence (more frequent over the past five years).Hate Crime Watch - Says crimes based on religious identity were in single digits until 2014.They surged from 9 in 2013 to 92 in 2018.In both studies - Uttar Pradesh topped the list for the third year, followed by Gujarat, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Bihar.Show that they have steadily risen over the past five years

LATEST STUDY…..Amnesty report: Hate crimes rose sharply the first half of 2019

What do these facts mean?

• These are striking enough to concern any government.
• The Rajasthan administration is introducing a Bill prohibiting cow vigilantism i.e. dealing with only one hate crime.
• An omnibus act against all hate crimes is required across India and should be a priority of the 17th Lok Sabha.

What are legislations in other countries?

• France has a draft Bill to prohibit hate speech.
• Germany amended Section 46 of its Criminal Procedure Code, dealing with sentencing in violent crime (Sentence must be based on consideration of the motives and aims of the offender).

What is the current situation in India?

• We have a number of sections in the IPC that can be used to punish or even prevent hate crime.
• But they are disparate and few policemen are aware of them.
• Those that are, fear to use them in areas whose political leaders mobilise through hate speech.

What is the Court directive?

• Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India, 2018 - The Supreme Court (SC) directed Central and State governments to make it widely known that lynching and mob violence would invite serious consequence under the law.
• Then the government had formed a panel to suggest measures to tackle mob violence.
• But, the panel’s recommendations are not in the public domain.

What does the Human Rights Watch India’s report say?

• Only some States had complied with the SC’s orders,
• To designate a senior police officer in every district to prevent incidents of mob violence and
• To ensure that the police take prompt action,
• To set up fast-track courts in such cases and
• To take action against policemen or officials who failed to comply.
• Those State governments that did comply did so only partially.
• In several instances, the police obstructed investigations.

What are the concerns?

• Whether it is political hate speech or police bias on the ground, there is little doubt that national bar against hate crime has been lowered.
• The commentary of hate speech and videos of lynching in TV is critical, repeated iterations normalise the hateful.
• The print media too is failing in dealing with these issues.
• Criticism of blatantly communal government actions has grown increasingly muted.

What are the key steps needed?

• The issue of dealing with incitement to violence through social media. But the focus is on hate in relation to terrorism.
• Parliament - Could enact an omnibus act against hate crime.
• Home Minister - Could set benchmarks for policemen and administrators to deal with hate crime.
• Legislature and political parties - Could suspend or dismiss members who are implicated in hate crimes or practise hate speech.
• Electronic and print media - Could stop showing or publishing hateful comments and threats.
• Priests  - Could preach the values of tolerance and respect that are common to all religions.
• Schools - Could revitalise courses on the directive principles of our Constitution.

TODAYS SOURCES DISCLAIMER:THE HINDU,United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,PAISA BAZAAR,WIKIPEDIA,IAS SCORE,DRISHTI IAS