Quote of the Day May 13, 2022

 

“Two men look out through the same bars; one sees the mud and the other one the stars.”
Frederick Langbridge

“दो व्यक्तियों ने एक ही सलाखों से बाहर झांका, एक को कीचड़ दिखाई देता है, दूसरे को तारे दिखाई देते हैं।”
फ्रेडरिक लैंगब्रिज

Current Affairs-May 13, 2022

 

INDIA

– Rajiv Kumar appointed new Chief Election Commissioner

– Extended-range (400 kms) BrahMos ALCM (Air Launched Cruise Missile) test fired from Sukhoi-30MKI fighter aircraft

– Finish Mathura-Idgah case hearing within 4 months, orders Allahabad HC

– Gujarat: PM addresses “Utkarsh Samaroh” in Bharuch district

– Prasar Bharati inks MoU with Madagascar counterpart for broadcasting collaboration

– External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar speaks to his Saudi counterpart Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud

– India-UK Healthcare Conference held in London

– Chhattisgarh government chopper crashes at Raipur airport; two pilots killed

ECONOMY & CORPORATE

– Country’s foreign exchange reserves declined by USD 28.05 billion to USD 607.31 billion at the end of March 2022: RBI

– Retail inflation in India surges to 8-year high of 7.79% in April

– Tata Sons appoints Campbell Wilson as CEO & MD of Air India

– Sanjiv Bajaj, CMD of Bajaj Finserv, takes over as CII President

WORLD

– Ukraine halts some Russian gas flows to Europe

– US President Joe Biden convenes 2nd global COVID-19 summit

– FAO celebrates International Day of Plant Health on May 12

– International Nurses Day celebrated on May 12

– AI Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh killed by Israeli troops in Palestine

– Google adds 24 new languages including Bhojpuri & Konkani to its Google Translate platform

– Google launches Pixel 6A smartphone and Pixel Buds Pro wireless earphones

– Cameroon: Small passenger plane crashes in a forest near capital Yaoundé

– Sri Lanka: Opposition leader Ranil Wickremesinghe (73) appointed new PM

– Nepal’s Lakpa Sherpa (48) reaches summit of Mount Everest for record 10th time; highest by any woman

SPORTS

– Athletics: Jyothi Yarraji creates new national record in women’s 100 m hurdles

National Technology Day

 Every year, May 11^th is celebrated in India as National Technology Day.

Why May 11^th is celebrated as National Technology Day?

To mark the anniversary of the Pokhran nuclear tests (Pokhran-II) conducted in May 1998.

What were the Pokhran-II nuclear tests?

They were a series of five nuclear tests conducted under the administration of Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam at the Indian Army’s Pokhran Test Range in Rajasthan’s Thar desert from 11^th to 13^th May 1998.

What was the code name of the Pokhran-II nuclear tests?

Operation Shakti.

When did India conduct its first nuclear test?

The first nuclear tests were conducted by India in 1974. It was code-named, Smiling Buddha.

When National Technology Day was first observed?

It was first observed on 11th May 1999.

What is the theme for this year’s National Technology Day?

Integrated Approach in Science & Technology for Sustainable Future.

How National Technology Day is celebrated?

The National Technology day pays honors scientists and engineers for their technological contributions to India. The Technology Development Board (TDB) under the Department of Science and Technology calls for applications for the national awards for the commercialization of technologies.

Under what categories, the awards are given?

The awards are given under the following three categories: National Awards, Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise (MSME) awards, and Startup awards.

What is Technology Development Board (TDB)?

Technology Development Board (TDB) is a statutory body, established in 1996 under the Technology Development Board Act, 1995. The objective of TDB is to promote the development and commercialization of indigenous technology.

AIM-PRIME Playbook

 The AIM-PRIME (Program for Researchers in Innovation, Market Readiness, and Entrepreneurship) Playbook has been launched by NITI Aayog.

What is the aim of the AIM-PRIME playbook?

The AIM-PRIME playbook has been launched with the aim of promoting early-stage deep technology ideas that are science-based to the market via guidance and training for a period of over 12 months. This will be done by using a learning curriculum that will be blended in nature. The area of focus will be on deep technology entrepreneurship that will be science-based as well as knowledge-intensive.

Who will be implementing the AIM-PRIME programme?

This programme is a national project of NITI Aayog’s Atal Innovation Mission. It is being implemented by Venture Centre, Pune in association with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Venture Centre is a non-profit technology business incubator that is being hosted by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research–National Chemical Laboratory (CSIR-NCL).

Who will be the beneficiaries of this programme?

The beneficiaries include:

• Technology developers who have deep tech business ideas that are science-based.
• CEOs as well as Senior incubation managers of Atal Incubation Centres that are looking to support deep tech entrepreneurs.

What are the other benefits of the AIM-PRIME programme?

• PRIME Library- it is a curated information source that is shared by expert mentors and the faculty of the programme.
• PRIME Videos- an open-access collection of videos of all the lectures that have been delivered in the PRIME Classroom.

What will the candidates selected for this programme get access to?

The candidates who will be selected for this programme will be getting access to various kinds of in-depth learning through:

• team projects
• lecture series
• mentoring that will be project-specific
• various exercises

The candidates will also be able to access a playbook that will be related to deep-tech start-ups as well as various other learning opportunities.

What is deep technology?

Deep technology is mostly start-up companies that are looking to provide technology solutions that are based on various important engineering and scientific challenges as well as scientific discoveries and advances. Deep Tech is generally set apart due to its intense enabling power and the changes it can create.

The importance of consent: On marital rape

 

The institution of marriage cannot be allowed to sanction force and violence

A split verdict in the Delhi High Court on the question of criminalising marital rape has reignited the controversy over legal protection for disregard of consent for sex within marriage. On Wednesday, while Justice Rajiv Shakdher, who headed the Bench, struck down as unconstitutional the exception to Section 375 of the IPC, which says that intercourse by a man with his wife aged 18 or above is not rape even if it is without her consent, Justice C. Hari Shankar rejected the plea to criminalise marital rape pointing out that any change in the law has to be carried out by the legislature since it requires consideration of social, cultural and legal aspects. With the judges differing on key points such as difficulty in getting evidence, the importance of consent, whether the state’s concerns about safeguarding the institution of marriage were valid, and if other laws against sexual violence protected married women, the issues involved may have to be ultimately adjudicated with the help of a third judge or a larger Bench of the High Court or the Supreme Court. The Union government has been opposing the removal of the marital rape exception. In 2016, it had rejected the concept of marital rape, saying it “cannot be applied to the Indian context” due to various reasons, not least because of the “mindset of society to treat marriage as a sacrament”. However, in the final hearing, the Union government did not take a stand on the issue.

Justice Shakdher’s opinion goes to the heart of the matter, inasmuch as it treats the absence of consent as the core ingredient of rape. He says what is defined as rape in law should be labelled as such, irrespective of whether it occurs within or outside marriage. He finds that the marital exception violates equality before law, as well as deprives women of the right to trigger a prosecution for non-consensual sex. Besides, it also discriminates among women based on their marital status and robs them of sexual agency and autonomy. In contrast, Justice Hari Shankar’s opinion, somewhat disconcertingly, de-emphasises the element of consent and lays much store by the importance of preserving the institution of marriage to such an extent that he holds that any legislation that keeps rape out of a marital relationship “is immune to interference”. If marriage is regarded as a partnership between equals, an exception in a 162-year-old law should have had no place. While there are other laws governing civil relationships that legitimise conjugal expectations, these cannot be seen as giving a free pass for violence within marriage, which is essentially what sex without consent is. Whether the legislative route is more appropriate in making marital rape a criminal offence is a matter of detail. What is important is that sexual violence has no place in society, and the institution of marriage is no exception.

Source: The Hindu, 13/05/22

What is FCRA, the law related to NGO funding which certain MHA officials are accused of violating?

 The CBI on Tuesday (May 10) carried out searches at 40 places and questioned six officials of the Foreigners Division of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) for allegedly accepting bribes to give clearances under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), 2010 to certain NGOs.

A CBI spokesperson said the operation was conducted “to nab representatives of NGOs, middlemen and public servants of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) division of MHA for committing violations of FCRA provisions and facilitating illegal clearances in lieu of bribes”.

Sources in the investigating agency claimed some of the accused, including public servants, have been apprehended while exchanging bribes. “Around half a dozen public servants and others are being questioned. During searches so far, transactions of around Rs 2 crore through hawala channels have been found,” a CBI officer said.

FCRA clearances have been a fraught issue for several years, and the government has often been accused of targetting NGOs for political or ideological reasons by cancelling or not renewing their clearances.

Earlier this year, in a petititon filed by the NGO Global Peace Initiative, the Supreme Court had asked thousands of NGOs to go back to the government for redressal of their grievances on non-renewal of their FCRA registrations. The registrations of about 5,900 NGOs had ceased to be active after December 31, 2021, owing to either the NGOs not applying for renewal before the due date, or the MHA refusing their renewal for alleged violation of the FCRA.

On December 25 last year, the MHA refused to renew the FCRA registration of Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity, based on “adverse inputs”. The registration was, however, restored on January 6, and Missionaries of Charity’s FCRA certificate was made valid until the end of 2026.

What is the FCRA?

The FCRA was enacted during the Emergency in 1976 amid apprehensions that foreign powers were interfering in India’s affairs by pumping money into the country through independent organisations. These concerns were, in fact, even older — they had been expressed in Parliament as early as in 1969.

The law sought to regulate foreign donations to individuals and associations so that they functioned “in a manner consistent with the values of a sovereign democratic republic”.

An amended FCRA was enacted under the UPA government in 2010 to “consolidate the law” on utilisation of foreign funds, and “to prohibit” their use for “any activities detrimental to national interest”.

The law was amended again by the current government in 2020, giving the government tighter control and scrutiny over the receipt and utilisation of foreign funds by NGOs.

Broadly, the FCRA requires every person or NGO seeking to receive foreign donations to be (i) registered under the Act, (ii) to open a bank account for the receipt of the foreign funds in State Bank of India, Delhi, and (iii) to utilise those funds only for the purpose for which they have been received and as stipulated in the Act.

They are also required to file annual returns, and they must not transfer the funds to another NGO.

The Act prohibits the receipt of foreign funds by candidates for elections, journalists or newspaper and media broadcast companies, judges and government servants, members of legislature and political parties or their office-bearers, and organisations of a political nature.

How is FCRA registration granted?

NGOs that want to receive foreign funds must apply online in a prescribed format with the required documentation. FCRA registrations are granted to individuals or associations that have definite cultural, economic, educational, religious, and social programmes.

Following the application by the NGO, the MHA makes inquiries through the Intelligence Bureau into the antecedents of the applicant, and accordingly processes the application.

Under the FCRA, the applicant should not be fictitious or benami; and should not have been prosecuted or convicted for indulging in activities aimed at conversion through inducement or force, either directly or indirectly, from one religious faith to another.

The applicant should also not have been prosecuted for or convicted of creating communal tension or disharmony; should not have been found guilty of diversion or misutilisation of funds; and should not be engaged or likely to be engaged in the propagation of sedition.

The MHA is required to approve or reject the application within 90 days. In case of failure to process the application in the given time, the MHA is expected to inform the NGO of the reasons for the same.

For how long is approval granted?

Once granted, FCRA registration is valid for five years. NGOs are expected to apply for renewal within six months of the date of expiry of registration. In case of failure to apply for renewal, the registration is deemed to have expired, and the NGO is no longer entitled to receive foreign funds or utilise its existing funds without permission from the ministry.

The FCRA registration of close to 5,900 NGOs, including Oxfam India Trust and Indian Medical Association, lapsed on December 31 last year. According to sources, the registration of as many as 5,789 NGOs had lapsed after they failed to apply for renewal before the due date. The rest, who had applied for renewal, were refused as the MHA found their operations or accounts to be in violation of the FCRA, sources had said at the time.

According to the MHA, NGOs failing to apply before the due date can petition the ministry with cogent reasons within four months of the expiry of registration, following which their applications can be reconsidered.

Many NGOs do not apply for renewal for a variety of reasons, which include either completion of the project for which the FCRA registration had been taken or the NGO itself folding up.

On what basis is approval cancelled?

The government reserves the right to cancel the FCRA registration of any NGO if it finds it to be in violation of the Act.

Registration can be cancelled if an inquiry finds a false statement in the application; if the NGO is found to have violated any of the terms and conditions of the certificate or renewal; if it has not been engaged in any reasonable activity in its chosen field for the benefit of society for two consecutive years; or if it has become defunct.

It can also be cancelled if “in the opinion of the Central Government, it is necessary in the public interest to cancel the certificate”, the FCRA says.

Registrations are also cancelled when an audit finds irregularities in the finances of an NGO in terms of misutilisation of foreign funds.

According to FCRA, no order of cancellation of certificate can be made unless the person or NGO concerned has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Once the registration of an NGO is cancelled, it is not eligible for re-registration for three years.

The ministry also has powers to suspend an NGO’s registration for 180 days pending inquiry, and can freeze its funds.
All orders of the government can be challenged in the High Court.

Which NGOs have been accused of violating FCRA provisions?

Several international and well-known NGOs such as Compassion International, Greenpeace India, Sabrang Trust, Lawyers’ Collective, Amnesty International, and Ford Foundation have come under the government’s scanner for alleged violations of FCRA.

Most have been accused of financial irregularities or “political activity” for cancellation of their registration. Amnesty was forced to shut its operation in India in 2020 following investigations launched by the Enforcement Directorate in 2018 into its financial dealings. Amnesty called the government action “witch-hunt of human-right activists…and a crackdown on dissent”.

Greenpeace India has scaled down its operations after its FCRA registration was cancelled in 2015 on grounds of opening multiple bank accounts, and movement of funds.

Lawyer Indira Jaising’s NGO Lawyers’ Collective is facing a CBI probe. In 2016, the MHA had cancelled the FCRA licence of the NGO for allegedly using foreign contributions for “political purposes”.

Activist Teesta Setalvad’s NGO Sabrang Trust had its FCRA registration cancelled in 2016 for allegedly mixing foreign and domestic funds, and for spending funds on publishing the Communalism Combat magazine.

In April 2015, the MHA put the Ford Foundation under the “prior approval category”, which meant that all funds from the organisation to recipients in India would have to be cleared by the government. The international NGO was also put on the Home Ministry’s watch list for some time in the interest of “national security”.

In 2016, Compassion International was barred by the government from funding NGOs in India over allegations of conversion.

Has the FCRA been used to target certain NGOs?

Until 2011, there were more than 40,000 NGOs registered under FCRA in India. That number now stands at 16,000.

Over the past few years, the government has faced allegations of targeting NGOs. Over the past seven years, the Narendra Modi government has cancelled the registration of more than 16,700 NGOs. Over 10,000 of these cancellations were carried out in 2015.

The previous UPA government had cracked down on NGOs following protests against the Kudankulam nuclear power project in Tamil Nadu. In 2012, the Manmohan Singh government cancelled the registration of almost 4,000 NGOs — up from just four the previous year.

It was under the UPA government that Greenpeace India first came under the scanner. Also, Amnesty International, which was first granted FCRA registration in 2000, was not allowed renewal of its registration by the UPA government.

Written by Deeptiman Tiwary

Source: Indian Express, 11/05/22

Marital rape is rape: Why modern India still won’t accept this

 On May 10, 2022, a two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court gave a split ruling on marital rape, thus ensuring a future hearing in the Supreme Court. The legal battles will, of course, continue but this may nevertheless be a good moment to examine the issues that lie behind it.

Obviously, marital rape is rape within marriage. But for most of history and in most parts of the world, such a thing simply did not make sense. Indeed, it could not make sense because the concepts of rape and marriage were seen as mutually exclusive – they could not be brought together.

To understand why this was so, we need to look at marriage. Across the world, and till very recently, marriage has been explicitly treated as being outside the purview of rape. Even in the Western countries that we associate with the more “advanced” practices of gender equality, marital rape was treated as an exception to the crime of rape till the early 1990s. Only the former Soviet Union had marital rape on its statute books soon after its creation in 1922. In the absence of a universal definition, several scholars take marriage to be an institution where a man and a woman live together, have sexual relations and engage in cooperative economic activity.

Others have emphasised the link between marriage and property, or more precisely, the passing on of property from one generation to the next. The dominant form of marriage in the modern West became quite distinctly patriarchal, visible in late 18th-century British law, for instance, whereby a wife became the property of her husband upon marriage. Sexually, economically and legally, she belonged to him. Husbands, therefore, had the right to access their wives sexually, without the question of coercion or consent being on the horizon in the first place. As property, wives had to be protected from the (illegal) sexual access of other men, and here too, their consent was irrelevant.

We can now appreciate why the idea of marital rape simply could not exist, much less become part of criminal law. As one of the first English legal writers on the subject put it, a man can no more rape his wife than he can rape himself. Moreover, sexual intercourse was necessary to “consummate” a marriage, within which, once again, consent was beside the point.

In the long century since feminist voices were first raised, the idea took shape that the dominant institution of marriage needed to be fundamentally rethought, such that, among other significant issues, marital rape was conceivable. For this to be possible, a woman must continue to be a person who can give or withhold consent, even after she consents to be a man’s wife. If what distinguishes the relationship of husband and wife from other relations between men and women is the legitimate expectation of sexual relations, then the introduction of marital rape signals the entry of a new and equally legitimate expectation: A wife’s consent to sexual relations is essential, and in this, she is no different from other women. Husbands no longer enjoy unquestioned rights over the bodies of their wives — this is what it means for a wife to be a person with bodily integrity.

It is strange, indeed, that most parts of the world, India included, became modern while continuing to believe that wives are the property of husbands. Hindu society upgraded prior notions of kanyadaan, the gift of the virgin from father to husband, in which, again, no notion of consent on her part was required. This became the subject of slow reform from the 19th century.

Why is it so hard even for contemporary society to accept that the commitment to marriage between two persons presupposes a kind of mutual respect that cannot include forcing oneself on the married partner? Why, instead, do we hear the opposite, for instance, the government of India’s argument in 2017 that removing the exception of marital rape would “destabilise the institution of marriage”? And why, in the words of the learned High Court judge who upheld the exception clause, should it be far worse to be “ravished by a stranger” than by one’s own life partner?

Written by Mary E John

The writer is an independent scholar, formerly professor at the Centre for Women’s Development Studies, New Delhi)

Source: Indian Express, 12/05/22