Daily Prelims Notes 12 May 2023

May 12, 2023
Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
Category: DPN

No Comments

Daily Prelims Notes

12 May 2023

Table Of Contents

1. Outbreak of Moroccan locusts

Subject : Environment

Section: Places in news

Context: Outbreak of Moroccan locusts will destroy 25% of annual wheat production in Afghanistan: FAO

More on the News:

The ‘large-scale’ outbreak of the Moroccan locust across eight provinces in Afghanistan’s wheat basket is likely to destroy 700,000-1.2 million tonnes of wheat or a quarter of the total annual harvest, alerted the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
This translates to $280 million-$480 million in economic losses— as of today’s prices in the country, stated FAO.
Under such circumstances, if the Moroccan locust population is left untreated, its population can increase 100 times in the next year, the FAO said. This will create even bigger problems for agriculture and food security for Afghanistan and that of its neighbours Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.
In Afghanistan, more than 6.1 million people are on the brink of famine-like conditions which puts the country in Phase 4 (emergency) of the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, according to the preliminary projections for November 2022-March 2023.
It is among the countries with the highest prevalence of insufficient food consumption. Hunger is primarily driven by the economic crisis that has gripped Afghanistan since August 2021, compounded by decades of conflict and climate shocks, according to 2023 Global report on food crisis

Reason for Outbreak:

Locust populations usually go up when temperatures are above average and rainfall below normal. The geographical spread of the Moroccan locust is normal when spring rainfall (from March to May) is about 100 millimetres.
But spring rainfall below 100 mm for the second or third consecutive year usually leads to an increase in the population of Moroccon locusts.
Afghanistan has entered into the third consecutive year of drought, creating the ideal environment for locusts to hatch and swarm.
There has been a shortage of chemical supplies across the country. As a result of this, the traditional ‘mechanical control’ methods were used to control the outbreak. Chemical locust control methods are far more effective than mechanical control.
So, effective ways to control the outbreaks is urgent funding to support both mechanical and chemical control measures, alongside on-the ground surveys to monitor and map locust hatching sites, stated the FAO.

2. WHO declares mpox is no longer public health emergency of global concern

Subject : International Relations

Section: International Organisation

Context: The director-general of the World Health Organization (WHO), Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, declared that mpox was no longer a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on May 11, 2023.

More on the News:

The announcement came a day after the fifth meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) Emergency Committee.
Emergency Committee acknowledged the progress made in the global response to the multi-country outbreak of mpox and the further decline in the number of reported cases since the last meeting
The panel also stressed the integration of mpox prevention, preparedness and response within national surveillance and control programmes, including for HIV and other sexually transmissible infections, as an important element of this longer-term transition.

International Health Regulations

About:

While disease outbreaks and other acute public health risks are often unpredictable and require a range of responses, the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) provide an overarching legal framework that defines countries’ rights and obligations in handling public health events and emergencies that have the potential to cross borders.
The IHR are an instrument of international law that is legally-binding on 196 countries, including the 194 WHO Member States. The IHR grew out of the response to deadly epidemics that once overran Europe.
They create rights and obligations for countries, including the requirement to report public health events. The Regulations also outline the criteria to determine whether or not a particular event constitutes a “public health emergency of international concern”.
At the same time, the IHR require countries to designate a National IHR Focal Point for communications with WHO, to establish and maintain core capacities for surveillance and response, including at designated points of entry.
Additional provisions address the areas of international travel and transport such as the health documents required for international traffic.
Finally, the IHR introduce important safeguards to protect the rights of travellers and other persons in relation to the treatment of personal data, informed consent and non-discrimination in the application of health measures under the Regulations.

Implementation:

The responsibility for implementing the IHR rests upon all States Parties that are bound by the Regulations and on WHO. Governments are responsible, including all of their sectors, ministries, levels, officials and personnel for implementing IHR at the national level.
WHO plays the coordinating role in IHR implementation and, together with its partners, helps countries to build capacities.
The IHR require that all countries have the ability to do the following:
- Detect: Make sure surveillance systems can detect acute public health events in timely matter
- Assess and report: Use the decision instrument in Annex 2 of the IHR to assess public health event and report to WHO through their National IHR Focal Point those that may constitute a public health emergency of international concern
- Respond: Respond to public health risks and emergencies
The goal of country implementation is to limit the spread of health risks to neighbouring countries and to prevent unwarranted travel and trade restrictions.

Preparedness:

WHO’s support focuses on the priority needs identified by the WHO Regional and Country Offices, in order to help each country meet its IHR commitment. This includes:
- designating WHO IHR Contact Points at the headquarters or the regional level;
- conducting global public health surveillance and assessment of significant public health events;
- disseminating public health information to Member States;
- offering technical assistance to Member States;
- supporting Member States in their efforts to assess their existing national public health structures and capacities for surveillance and response, including at designated points of entry;
- monitoring the implementation of IHR (2005) and updating guidelines; and
- if required, determining whether or not a particular event constitutes a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC), with advice from external experts.
If a PHEIC is declared, WHO develops and recommends the critical health measures for implementation by Member States during such an emergency.

Monkeypox

Monkeypox was first reported in 1958 in laboratory monkeys and the ﬁrst human case was reported in 1970 in a nine month old baby in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Nigeria reported its ﬁrst case of monkeypox in humans in 1970 when one case was detected; there were two human cases of monkeypox in Nigeria in 1978.
And after nearly four decades of not reporting any cases, monkeypox (West African clade) made a re-emergence in Nigeria in September 2017 with a total of 558 cases reported till now.
In November last year, the disease’s name was changed by WHO from ‘monkeypox’ to ‘mpox’ to reduce racial and sexual stigma surrounding it.

Spread:

Based on epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 122 confirmed or probable cases of human monkeypox cases in Nigeria, researchers found both primary zoonotic and human to human transmission.
Like all diseases that are endemic only to Africa, while eﬀorts were made to prevent an outbreak in the non-endemic countries outside Africa, no serious international attempts were made to stop the outbreak in Nigeria nor study the virus characteristics.
The current outbreak in Europe and North America is the ﬁrst instance when large scale human to human transmission has been reported outside Africa.
There are no clear answers to how humans are infected as the host animal that behaves as a reservoir for the virus has not been identified in the wild. And how the virus spreads from animals to humans is not known.
The current outbreak appears to have spread primarily among men who have sex with men.
The virus is not transmitted through semen or vaginal ﬂuids but the skin to skin contact during sex can result in virus spread.

Low mutation rate

Till date over 15 monkeypox genomes have been sequenced. But the monkeypox virus has a lower mutation rate (about two mutations a year) compared to nearly 25 mutations in a year in the case of SARS CoV2 virus.
This is because monkeypox is a DNA virus unlike the SARSCoV2, which is an RNA virus.
It is yet unclear if the virus has acquired the ability of sustained transmission among humans.

Covid is no longer an emergency: https://optimizeias.com/covid-is-no-longer-an-emergency/

3. Delhi govt. has control over officers, says Supreme Court

Subject : Polity

Section: Federalism

Concept :

On 11th of May 2023, the Supreme Court said that the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi has legislative and executive power over administrative services in the National Capital, other than the matters relating to public order, police and land.
According to the Supreme Court, the Delhi government, much like other States, represents the representative form of government and any further expansion of the Union’s power will be contrary to the Constitutional scheme.

Details

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice of India held that the Lieutenant-Governor (L-G) can exercise executive power on behalf of the Centre only in the three areas of public order, police and land in Delhi as mentioned in Article 239AA(3)(a).
The Bench said that the L-G does not have sweeping executive powers over the national capital, and the Centre should be mindful of the unique “asymmetric federal model” of governance adopted for Delhi.
The court also noted that the sui generis (special status) granted to Delhi should align with “cooperative federalism”.

Control over Administrative Services:

In 2019, a two-judge bench of the SC delivered a split verdict on the aspect of who controls administrative services in Delhi.
The two-judge bench had recommended that a three-judge bench be set up to decide the issue of control of administrative services.
Further, in May 2022, a three-judge Bench had referred this case to a larger Bench on the Central government’s plea.
The three-judge Bench had decided that the question of control over administrative services required “further examination”.

Central & State Government’s Arguments:

The Central Government has consistently maintained that because Delhi is the national capital and the face of the country, it must have control over administrative services, which include appointments and transfers.
On the other hand, the Delhi government has argued that in the interest of federalism, the elected representatives must have power over transfers and postings.
The Delhi government had also contended that the recent amendments to the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021, violate the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution.
Legal Issues before the SC
There were two legal issues before the court –
The first arises from a reference made by a two-judge Bench in February 2019.
While deciding on the distribution of powers between the Delhi government and Centre, left the question of who will have control over the administrative services for consideration by a larger Bench.
Second issue is the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2021, passed by the Parliament.
The Act provided that the term “government” referred to in any law made by the Legislative Assembly of Delhi will imply the Lieutenant Governor (L-G).
However, the Delhi government has challenged the constitutional validity of the Act.

Articles 239AA:

Article 239AA of the Constitution of India granted Special Status to Delhi among Union Territories (UTs) in the year 1991 through the 69th constitutional amendment by the Parliament.
It provided a Legislative Assembly and a Council of Ministers responsible to such Assembly. Delhi was named as ‘National Capital Region (NCT) of Delhi’.
As per Article 239AA – Public Order, Police & Land in NCT of Delhi fall within the domain and control of Central Government which shall have the power to make laws on these matters.
For remaining matters of State List or Concurrent List, in so far as any such matter is applicable to UTs, the Legislative Assembly shall have the power to make laws for NCT of Delhi.
As per Article 239AA (4), in the case of a difference of opinion between the Lt. Governor and his Ministers on any matter, the Lt. Governor shall refer it to the President for decision and act according to that decision. In the meantime, if the Lt. Governor thinks that the matter is urgent he can take immediate action on his own.

Government of NCT of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2021

The Act basically gives more power to the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of the National Capital Territory of Delhi and diminished the elected government’s power.
The Act also seeks to bring in some clarity on certain subjects in the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991.
The Act makes amendments to the Government of National Territory of Delhi Act, 1991.
It gives more power to the LG in some respects while ensuring the Delhi Legislative Assembly’s accountability.
As per the Act’s objects and reasons, it is aimed at ending the absence of clarity on what matters or proposals are needed to be submitted to the LG before orders could be issued.
It also aims to “further define the responsibilities of the elected government and Lieutenant Governor (LG) in Delhi”.

GNCT Act Provisions

Some of the important provisions of the Government of NCT of Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021 are discussed below:
The term ‘government’ mentioned in any law enacted by the legislative assembly of Delhi shall mean the LG. The Act defines ‘government’ as the LG.
The Act provides discretionary powers to the LG even in matters where the Legislative Assembly is empowered to make laws.
An additional clause added to Section 44 of the 1991 Act makes it mandatory for the government to obtain the opinion of the LG on all matters before any executive action can be taken, ensuring accountability.
This means that the state government or cabinet would need to seek the LG’s opinion before implementing any decision.
The amendment also says that the “Legislative Assembly shall not make any rule to enable itself to consider the matters of the day-to-day administration of the Capital or conduct inquiries in relation to the administrative decisions”.

4. GST e-invoicing to include smaller firms from August 2

Subject : Economy

Section: Fiscal policy

Concept :

Centre has made it mandatory for all businesses with an annual turnover of ₹5 crore to use e-invoices from August 1.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), which notified the reduction from the current ₹10-crore level stipulated for e-invoicing late Wednesday, also rolled out an ‘Automated Return Scrutiny Module’ for GST returns.
The module’s implementation has already commenced with the scrutiny of GST returns for the financial year 2019-20.

e-Invoicing

e-Invoicing under GST denotes electronic invoicing defined by the GST law. Just like how a GST-registered business uses an e-way bill while transporting goods from one place to another.
Similarly, certain notified GST-registered businesses must generate e invoice for Business-to-Business (B2B) transactions.

About Automated Return Scrutiny Module

The module is a part of a non-intrusive compliance verification process designed for Central Tax Officers to scrutinize GST returns of Centre Administered Taxpayers.
Taxpayers are selected based on data analytics and risks identified by the system. The module displays discrepancies and risks associated with a return to tax officers in their dashboard, streamlining the communication and action process.
The Automated Return Scrutiny Module, integrated into the ACES-GST backend application, leverages data analytics to identify risks and discrepancies in GST returns.
The module automatically generates alerts in cases of non-compliance.
Automated Return Scrutiny Module for GST returns is a significant step towards improving tax compliance and simplifying the tax administration process.

5. SC Ruling on Sena vs Sena

Subject : Polity

Section: Parliament

Concept :

The Supreme Court has passed a unanimous judgement on the various issues related to the split in Shiv Sena in June 2022.
While passing the judgement, the apex court made strong observations about the role of the then Governor of Maharashtra and the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly.
The court, however, refrained from interfering with the proceedings related to disqualifying 16 MLAs, including Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

Matter referred to five-judge Constitution Bench

In August 2022, a three-judge SC bench led by then CJI N V Ramana referred the questions arising out of petitions filed by rival camps to a five-judge Constitution Bench.
It said that the Nabam Rebia verdict requires gap filling to uphold constitutional morality.

What is 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment?

In Nabam Rebia case (2016), the SC held that a speaker will be disabled from deciding disqualification petitions under the anti-defection law (10th schedule of the constitution) if a notice for their removal is pending.
In other words, this judgement stopped a Speaker facing removal notice from deciding disqualification pleas against members of legislatures under anti-defection law.

What SC said in ruling on Sena tussle?

Disqualification of MLAs
The Supreme Court said it cannot interfere in the proceedings and the Speaker of the Maharashtra Assembly must decide on the issue of the disqualification of the 16 MLAs.
On restoring Uddhav Thackeray govt
The SC held since Uddhav Thackeray resigned as the chief minister and did not face the floor test, his government cannot be reinstated.
It said, had Thackeray refrained from resigning from his post, the court could have restored his government.
The court also held that the decision of the governor in calling Shinde to administer him an oath as CM was justified.
On governor’s role in calling floor test
The court held that by calling the floor test, the then Maharashtra governor did not act in accordance with the law as he had no objective material to doubt the confidence of the Thackeray government in the House.
The court said the Governor had acted upon an inference that a section of the Shiv Sena wished to withdraw their support to the government.
However, the communication by some of the MLAs only expressed discontent about the Maha Vikas Aghadi alliance.
It said that the power of the Governor to act without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers is of an extraordinary nature, and must be exercised with circumspection within the limits of law.
It also said that the Governor is not empowered to enter the political arena and play a role in inter or intra party disputes.
Appointment of whip from Shinde group illegal
It said the appointment of the chief whip by a political party is crucial to the Tenth Schedule and the system will crumble if it is not complied with.
The Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution is also known as the Anti-Defection Law. It was added to the Constitution in 1985 through the 52nd Amendment Act.
It also held that the speaker should have conducted an independent inquiry to identify two whips issued by (the two factions) the political party.
Speaker and EC can adjudicate issues concurrently
The court said it could not accept the contention that the EC was barred from deciding on the party symbol dispute until the Speaker decided the disqualification pleas before him.
The court said this would amount to indefinitely staying proceedings before the ECI.
This is because the Speaker’s decision would attain finality only after the appeals against his decision were disposed of.
Referral of issues in Nabam Rebia judgement to larger bench
The five-judge bench referred certain issues related to its 2016 judgment in the Nabam Rebia case to a larger bench.
One of the issues is whether a notice for removal of a Speaker would restrict the powers of the Speaker to issue disqualification notices to MLAs.

6. 25th anniversary of Pokhran-II: India’s journey to become a nuclear power

Subject: Science and tech

Section: Nuclear energy

Context:

India successfully conducted three nuclear bomb test explosions at the testing site in Pokhran on May 11, 1998. While these tests caused an international outcry at the time, they cemented India’s status as a nuclear power

India’s Nuclear Journey:

India’s nuclear programme can be traced to the work of physicist Homi J Bhaba. In 1945, after Bhaba’s successful lobbying of India’s biggest industrial family, the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research was opened in Bombay. TIFR was India’s first research institution dedicated to the study of nuclear physics.
Post independence, with continuous effort from Homi J Bhaba in 1954, the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) was founded, with Bhabha as director.
A pivotal moment in India’s nuclear journey came after it suffered a crushing defeat in the 1962 Sino-Indian War and China’s subsequent nuclear bomb test at Lop Nor in 1964.
Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri first tried to attain nuclear guarantees from established nuclear weapons states, when such guarantees did not emerge, a different route had to be taken.
Things were further accelerated, when in 1965, India went to war with Pakistan once again, with China openly supporting Pakistan this time. Effectively, India was surrounded by two unfriendly nations, and needed to take steps towards building self-sufficiency.
By the 1960s, discourse around nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation had shifted to the mainstream as the Cold War arms pushed the US and the USSR to great extremes.
After China successfully tested its own bomb, there was increasing international consensus among the big powers regarding the need for a non-proliferation treaty.

The “discriminatory” NPT

In 1968, the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) came into existence.
The treaty defines nuclear-weapon states as those that have built and tested a nuclear explosive device before January 1, 1967 – the US, Russia (formerly USSR), the UK, France and China – and effectively disallows any other state from acquiring nuclear weapons.
While the treaty has been signed by almost every country in the world, India is one of the non signatories.

Pokhran-I and its aftermath

By the 1970s, India was capable of conducting a nuclear bomb test. Bhaba’s successor at the DAE, Vikram Sarabhai had worked to significantly broaden India’s nuclear technology.
On May 18, 1974, with support from Indira, India carried out its first nuclear test at the Pokhran test site. Pokhran-I, codenamed Operation Smiling Buddha, would be billed as a “peaceful nuclear explosion”, with “few military implications”.
However, there was near-universal condemnation and countries like the US and Canada imposed significant international sanctions on India. These sanctions would be a major setback for India’s nuclear journey, and majorly decelerate its progress.
In 1983, the Defence Research and Development Organisation’s (DRDO) funding was increased and Dr APJ Abdul Kalam was put in charge of India’s missile programme.
That year, India also developed capabilities to reprocess plutonium to weapons grade. Furthermore, throughout the decade, India exponentially increased its plutonium stockpiles.
With the fall of the USSR in 1991, India lost one of its biggest military allies, since the time Indira Gandhi had signed a 20-year security pact with it in 1971.
Furthermore, the US continued to provide military aid to Pakistan despite its own misgivings with its nuclear weapons programme.

Pokhran-II: projecting India’s strength

In March 1998, Pakistan launched the Ghauri missile – built with assistance from China. Two months later, India responded with Operation Shakti.
While the 1974 tests were ostensibly done for peaceful purposes, the 1998 tests were the culmination of India’s nuclear weaponisation process. Consequently, the Indian Government declared itself as a state possessing nuclear weapons following Pokhran-II.
While the tests in 1998 also invited sanctions from some countries (like the US), the condemnation was far from universal like in 1974.

7. Ethnic ties, family bonds: Why Mizoram is concerned about Manipur violence

Subject : Geography

Section: Places in news

Context:

As the initial reports of the unrest in Manipur emerged, its neighbour Mizoram was the first to express “deep concern” on the matter from Chief Minister Zoramthanga

Background:

The clashes in Manipur primarily involving the numerically dominant Meitei community and the minority Kuki tribe have displaced many people in the last few days.
A “tribal solidarity march” on May 3 to protest against the inclusion of the Meiteis in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) category was just the immediate trigger
Other government actions like the crackdown on poppy plantations and eviction drives, to frequent allegations that the Kukis of Churachandpur were sheltering “foreigners” from Myanmar have led to simmering tensions in the state’s southern hill districts, which border Myanmar.

The ethnic bond

At the heart of Mizoram’s strong political reaction is the deep ethnic bond the Mizos and Kukis share. The Chin-Kuki-Mizos are a conglomerate ethnic group collectively known as the ‘Zo’ people.
Historically, culturally, socially, linguistically, they are all related. these “ethnic tribes commonly traced their historical origin to a mythological cave known by different names by different tribes
They are known as Chin when they settle in Burmese plains and Chin became their official name in Burma. Those who moved down to Lushai Hills (Mizoram) and Chittagong Hill Tracts(Bangladesh) from Chin Hills were known as Kuki and Kuki became the official name in India
The term ‘Mizo’ began to be used officially in Lushai Hills (present Mizoram) since 1946. After that, Mizo began to be used popularly in Mizoram
Mizo comprises of 5 major tribes and 11 minor tribes known under the common name Awzia. The 5 major tribes are Lushei, Ralte, Hmar, Paihte, Pawi (Poi).
Mizos are of Mongoloid origin, speaking a dialect of Tibeto Burman origin
The literacy rate is the second highest in the country