CAO The Hindu NOTES – 18th May, 2018 (Daily News Paper Current Affairs Analysis)
📰THE HINDU NEWSPAPER – DAILY Hindu Current Affairs Analysis
Date:- 18th May 2018
SECTION 144 IN ASSAM DISTRICT AFTER CLASH OVER BUILDING TOILET (GS 2 POLITY)
Why in news?
Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was promulgated in southern Assam’s Hailakandi district after a clash over the construction of a pay-and-use toilet.
What should we know? – section 144.
It is an Indian Law under Indian Penal Code.
The history of this Section goes back to British Raj. Section 144 was used for the first time in 1861 by the British Raj, and thereafter became an important tool to stop all nationalist protests during the India’s Independence Struggle.
When a group of people assembles with an intention of disturbing the public tranquility, such assembly is known as an unlawful assembly. Section 144 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) is used to prevent such assemblies.
The Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) prohibits any assembly of five or more people in an area where it has been imposed. According to the law, every member of such “unlawful assembly” can be booked for “engaging in rioting”. The maximum punishment for such act is three years. Moreover, obstructing police from breaking up an unlawful assembly is a punishable offence as well. It also empowers the authorities to block the internet access.
The orders for imposing sec 144 have been conferred to Executive Magistrate, when there is an emergency situation. Before imposing Sec 144, Executive Magistrate has to ensure whether there is need to impose section 144. For this he/she need to demand material facts.
‘REWARD STATES FOR POLICIES THAT STABILISE POPULATION’ (GS 2 POLITY)
There has been much discussions at political and economic levels about the impact of population difference between the southern and northern states, as the 15th financial commission is about to start its work
What is the issue?
The terms of reference for the consideration of the 15th Finance Commission have raised doubts over that cooperative spirit of the centre.
The proposal for the use of 2011 census, instead of the 1971 data being used now as the basis for resources allocation between states is the most serious issue.
While on the first look, the idea of using the most recent Census data available seems reasonable, the proposal unleashes immense socio-political challenges.
This is because that such a change in census data would be disadvantageous to states that performed better in controlling their population over the decades (read southern state).
One has to bear in mind that Lower population growth is inherently linked to “lower fertility rates”, which is a consequence of better education, health services and development. Now it is seemingly apparent that the states that have progressed faster are being penalised for their successes in developmental initiatives.
Here arises the question is it fair to put some states to disadvantage because of the fact that they were successful is accomplishing targets set by the nation, instead of rewarding them.
Possible outcomes if 2011 data is used.
If the finance commission decides to go this way, funds for southern states might get stifled as their family planning initiatives have almost stabilised their populations. Even West Bengal and North Eastern states which have had considerable success in population control and might thereby see their share of allocations reduce.
This would infect reduce the incentives on states to control their population. Then some northern states continue to see a burgeoning trend in their population with little control, as more population would mean more devolved funds.
This is creating inter-state tensions, which is adding to the already existing cultural tensions between the northern and southern states.
‘Need to balance’
While it makes sense to give weightages based on the most current trends in population (more funds to more populous states) but that can’t come at the expense of the States that have done a good job on bringing their populations under control in accordance with the population policy of post-independence India.
180 DAYS TOO LONG FOR RESOLVING INSOLVENCY, SAYS IBBI MEMBER (GS 3 ECONOMICS |OPINION)
With demands for more time to resolve cases filed for bankruptcy being heard in the economy a member of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), Mukulita Vijayawargiya said at an event organised by CII that the current time limit to resolve insolvency cases was more than adequate.
She maintained that in the current times, we have professionals with technology and offices that are increasing efficiency of the process and with the availability of these, no time should be lost. The sooner we remove such cases, the sooner will we clear the way for the business sector to move ahead.
What is the mandate now?
Currently, an insolvency and bankruptcy case admitted in the National Company Law Tribunal, has to be resolved within 180 days, failing which the company goes into liquidation.
It is only in exceptional cases, the NCLT may allow another 90 days for resolution.
About Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI)
IBBI is the regulator for overseeing insolvency proceedings of service providers like Insolvency Professional Agencies (IPA), Insolvency Professionals (IP) and Information Utilities (IU) in India. It was given statutory powers through the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. It functions under Ministry of Commerce.
The Code provides for a market-determined and time-bound resolution of insolvency proceedings. It became operational in December 2016. It covers Individuals, Companies, Limited Liability Partnerships and Partnership firms. It attempts to simplify the process of insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings and speed up the resolution process for stressed assets in the country.
U.S. SANCTIONS ON RUSSIA MAY BE DISCUSSED IN SOCHI (GS 2 IR)
Prime Minister Narendra Modi will travel to Russia to meet President Vladimir Putin, for what government sources called an “exchange of views” on various international issues including the U.S. sanctions on Russia and Iran, and India’s commitment to its defence ties with Russia.
Independent policy stand from the west
In the times of turbulency in international politics, India has to walk a tightrope, balancing its relations with various countries which are at conflict with each other (USA, IRAN, RUSSIA, ISRAEL etc.)
In this regard there’s certain stand/decisions taken by India which would guide/set stage for its interaction in global arena.
In Defence procurement, India will not allow our defence requirements to be dictated by any other country. Whatever is in India’s interests in terms of procuring equipment for national security is what will determine how we act with various countries? This is regard with sanctions by USA with respect to Russia and possible Iran in near future.
The government has made it clear that it is also standing by Russia on the two latest issues and demanded evidence of the allegations by the U.S. and European countries before apportioning blame in case of –
- standoff with western countries over the Salisbury case of chemical poisoning of two Russians in the U.K.,
- alleged Russian support to the Assad regime for chemical attacks in Syria.
ED ATTACHES RS. 184 CR WORTH ASSETS OF OFFICIALS (GS 3 GOVERNANCE)
The Enforcement Directorate had provisionally attached assets worth Rs. 184.68 crore of an Udaipur-based chartered accountant and others, including bank officials, for allegedly cheating the Syndicate Bank.
We need to know what ED is
What is Enforcement Directorate (ED)?
The Economic Enforcement is economic intelligence and law enforcement agency responsible for enforcing economic laws and fighting economic crime in India.
The origin of this Directorate goes back to 1 May 1956, when an ‘Enforcement Unit’ was formed, in Department of Economic Affairs, for handling Exchange Control Laws violations under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. In the year 1957, this Unit was renamed as ‘Enforcement Directorate
It functions under the aegis of the Department of Revenue, Union Ministry of Finance.
It has a mandate to enforce two of most stringent laws in the country. They are Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) to check black money and hawala trade cases.
It comprises officers of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Revenue Service (IRS) and Indian Police Service (IPS).