Integrated Air Defence Weapon System (IADWS)

Syllabus subtopic: Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and Agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests.

Prelims and Mains focus: about the India-US weapon deal; about IADWS

News: The U.S. Department of State has approved the potential sale of a $1.867 billion Integrated Air Defence Weapon System (IADWS) to India.

About the weapon system

• The Integrated Air Defence Weapon System, also known as the National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System (NASAMS), provides integrated air missile defence and is currently deployed around Washington, DC.

• The IADWS system includes radar, launchers, targeting, and guidance systems, advanced medium-range air-to-air missile (AMRAAM) and Stinger missiles, and related equipment and support.

About the deal

• The potential sale, which is being processed via the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route, is now before the U.S. Congress for consideration, with a 30-day window for Congress to raise any objections to the sale.

• The Indian government had asked to buy an IADWS comprised of five AN/MPQ-64Fl Sentinel radar systems; 118 AMRAAM AIM-120C-7/C-8 missiles; three AMRAAM Guidance Sections; four AMRAAM Control Sections and 134 Stinger FIM-92L missiles.

• Also included are 32 M4A1 rifles; 40,320 M855 5.56mm cartridges; Fire Distribution Centres (FDC); Handheld Remote Terminals; Electrical Optical/Infrared (EO/IR) Sensor Systems; AMRAAM Non-Developmental Item-Airborne Instrumentation Units (NDI-AIU); Multi-spectral Targeting System-Model A (MTS-A); Canister Launchers (CN); High Mobility Launchers (HML); Dual Mount Stinger (DMS) Air Defence Systems; Vehicle Mounted Stinger Rapid Ranger Air Defence Systems, the statement said.

• Communications equipment, testing and training equipment and documentation and technical and logistics support are also part of the package.

Significance

• India intends to use these defence articles and services to modernize its armed forces and expand its existing air defence architecture to counter threats posed by air attacks.

• This will contribute to India's military goal to update its capability while further enhancing greater interoperability between India, the US, and other allies.

Syllabus subtopic: Issues Relating to Development and Management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources.

Prelims and Mains focus: about the draft policy and its features; its criticisms

News: After being directed by the Madras High Court, on January 6, to consider the issue of providing medical care to those suffering from the rare Lysosomal Storage Disorders (LSD) as a “national emergency”, the Centre informed the court of having notified a draft national policy on rare diseases.

About the draft policy

• It proposes to set up a registry under the Indian Council of Medical research (ICMR) to create a database.

• To provide financial assistance of up to Rs 15 lakh to Ayushman Bharat beneficiaries for rare diseases that require a one-time treatment in tertiary hospitals only.

• It also suggests voluntary crowdfunding as an alternate means of financial support and notifying government hospitals to facilitate treatment.

• Alternatively, the draft proposes to set up a digital platform for voluntary crowdfunding.

• The draft policy also categorises rare diseases under three categories based on clinical experiences and treatment availability. The policy also states that in the absence of data to clearly define rare diseases, such diseases in India will construe the three categories as identified in the policy.

Criticism of the policy

Public health groups have criticised the policy on following grounds:

1. It appears the entire policy is drafted to justify that government cannot provide treatment due to high cost as it is resource constrained.
2. The policy has adopted a very narrow scope limited to only 3 categories, while ignoring those where treatment is yet to be developed and R&D is required.

Rare diseases

• According to the government, so far only about 450 diseases have been recorded in India from tertiary care hospitals that are globally considered as rare diseases.

• The most commonly reported diseases include Haemophilia, Thalassemia, Sickle-cell Anaemia and Primary Immuno Deficiency in children, auto-immune diseases, Lysosomal storage disorders such as Pompe disease, Hirschsprung disease, Gaucher’s disease, Cystic Fibrosis, Hemangiomas and certain forms of muscular dystrophies.

• There are 7,000 - 8,000 rare diseases, but less than 5% have therapies available. About 95% rare diseases have no approved treatment and less than 1 in 10 patients receive disease specific treatment. Where drugs are available, they are expensive.

Syllabus subtopic:

• Issues Relating to Development and Management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources.
• Linkages between Development and Spread of Extremism.

Prelims and Mains focus: about the case; salwa judum; about NHRC: composition and powers

News: The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has accused state officials of the Chhattisgarh government of ‘abetting’ the crimes allegedly committed by Special Police Officers as part of Salwa Judum’s anti-Maoist activities in the state.

Background

According to the complaint, filed by human rights organisation People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), seven people were killed and 95 houses were torched by SPOs in the three villages, leading to other villagers abandoning their homes and fleeing. When they returned in 2013, the villagers filed a complaint with the Sukma collector in July 2013. The NHRC requested them to provide information.

What is Salwa Judum?

• Salwa Judum (meaning "Peace March" or "Purification Hunt" in Gondi language) was a militia that was mobilised and deployed as part of anti-insurgency operations in Chhattisgarh, India, aimed at countering Naxalite violence in the region.

• It started in 2005 as a state sponsored vigilante movement against the Naxalites, a far-left movement with Maoist ideology in some states in rural India that is designated by India as a terrorist organisation on account of their violent activities. The movement later received bi-partisan support from both the ruling and opposition parties.

• In 2008, Chhattisgarh along with neighbouring Jharkhand accounted for over 65% of the total Naxal violence in the country. Chhattisgarh state had trained a number of 'Special Police Officers' or SPOs (also commonly referred to as Koya commandos), from amongst the tribals who were part of Salwa Judum

• The militia, consisting of local tribal youth, received support and training from the Chhattisgarh state government. It has been outlawed and banned by a Supreme Court court order, but continues to exist in the form of Armed Auxiliary Forces, District Reserve Group and other vigilante groups.

• On 5 July 2011, the Supreme Court of India declared the militia to be illegal and unconstitutional, and ordered its disbanding. The Court directed the Chhattisgarh government to recover all the firearms, ammunition and accessories. The use of Salwa Judum by the government for anti-Naxal operations was criticised for its violations of human rights and poorly trained youth for counter-insurgency roles. It also ordered the government to investigate all instances of alleged criminal activities of Salwa Judum.

• On 25 May 2013, its founder Mahendra Karma, who had become a senior Congress party leader was killed in a Naxalite attack along with other party members in Darbha Valley of Chhattisgarh, 400 km south of Raipur and 50 km from Jagdalpur.

Syllabus subtopic: Government Policies and Interventions for Development in various sectors and Issues arising out of their Design and Implementation.

Prelims and Mains focus: about the court’s ruling; about SC/ST act and amendments to it; arguements against the amendments

News: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of amendments made in 2018 to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Background

The amendments were brought to nullify the effect of the top court’s March 20, 2018 judgment in the Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs State of Maharashtra & Another case. In it, the SC took serious note of “instances of abuse” of the 1986 law by “vested interests” for political or personal reasons, and laid down stringent safeguards, including provision for anticipatory bail and a “preliminary inquiry” before registering a case under the SC/ST Act.

What were those amendments?

• It said that a police officer investigating a case under the law will not require prior sanction for arresting an accused.

• It also said the provision of anticipatory bail will not apply to cases under the Act.

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

• The SC/ST Act was enacted to prevent atrocities against scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.

• It was enacted when the provisions of the existing laws (such as the Protection of Civil Rights Act 1955 and Indian Penal Code) were found to be inadequate to check these crimes (defined as 'atrocities' in the Act). Recognising the continuing gross indignities and offences against Scheduled Castes and Tribes, the Parliament passed the Act.

Objectives of the Act

1. to deliver justice to these communities through proactive efforts to enable them to live in society with dignity and self-esteem and without fear or violence or suppression from the dominant castes.
2. The practice of untouchability, in its overt and covert form was made a cognizable and non compoundable offence, and strict punishment is provided for any such offence.

• Section 23(1) of the Act authorises the Central Government to frame rules for carrying out the purpose of the Act. Drawing power from this section, the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules of 1995 were framed. The rules for the Act were notified on 31 March 1995.

• The purpose of the Act was to help the social inclusion of Dalits into Indian society, but the Act has failed to live up to its expectations admitted by the Union Minister for Home Affairs in parliament on 30 August 2010.

• A number of cases of misuse of this Act has been reported from different parts of the country as mentioned in the Supreme Court verdict of 20 March 2018. In this verdict, the Supreme Court of India banned immediate arrest of a person accused of insulting or injuring a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe member to protect innocents from arbitrary arrest.

SC/ST amendment Act, 2018

• In August, 2018, the parliament of India passed the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Bill, 2018, to bypass the ruling of the Supreme Court of India laying down procedures for arrests under the Act.

• The bill inserts section 18A (1) (a) in the 1989 Act, that says a “preliminary enquiry shall not be required for registration of an FIR against any person.”

• The Bill also inserts Section 18A (1) (b), which says “the investigating officer shall not require approval for the arrest, if necessary, of any person against whom an accusation of having committed an offence under this Act has been made and no procedure, other than that provided under this Act or the Code, shall apply.”

Arguements against the 2018 amendments to the Act

• The act violates “basic principles of liberty and accountability” after the amendments. According to a plea filed in the Supreme Court, “the Supreme Court cannot remain a mute spectator to the abuse of law as we are living in a civilised society and there were many growing instances of misuse of this act.

• The new law could be used to harass citizens by arresting them on the basis of mere allegations.

• The amendment excludes Section 438 of CrPC, violates constitutional mandate under Articles 14 and 21.

• The amendments rule out any provision for anticipatory bail for a person accused of atrocities against SC/STs, notwithstanding any court order.

Syllabus subtopic: Issues Relating to Development and Management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources.

Prelims and Mains focus: about the move and its significance; arguements for and against the move; about indigenous Assamese muslims and their concerns

News: Assam is planning to implement a census to identify Assam’s ‘khilonjiya’, or indigenous Muslim population in 2020.

Background

• The Assam Budget 2019-2020 (announced in February 2019) listed the creation of a ‘Development Corporation for Indigenous Muslims’ aimed at the ‘holistic development’ of the community as well as a “socio-economic census” to help assess their “socio-economic condition”.

• On February 6, 2020, a memo was issued by the Welfare of Minorities and Development Department calling for a meeting regarding a socio-economic census of indigenous Muslims of Assam — Goria, Moria, Ujani, Deshi, Jola, Mainal, Syed etc.

• However, the state govt. said the planned census is not a socio-economic one but simply to count the population of the indigenous Muslims of Assam.

About the Assamese Muslim community

• Under the umbrella of the indigenous Assamese Muslim community fall three main groups: the Goriyas, the Moriyas (from Upper Assam) and the Deshis (from Lower Assam).

• While the Deshis are 13th century converts from indigenous communities such as Koch Rajbongshi and Mech, the Goriyas and Moriyas trace their lineage to converts as well as soldiers, karigars etc who came to the region during the Ahom rule. Smaller groups such as Julha Muslims also fall under this category.

• These groups consider themselves distinct from the Bengali-speaking Muslims who migrated from East Bengal or Bangladesh.

Arguements in favour of conducting a census

• Many indigenous Muslims have been wrongfully tagged D-voter or Doubtful-voter in Assam. They face a major identity crisis since they are confused with Bangladeshis.

• According to Census 2011, Muslims constitute 34.22 per cent of the 3.12 crore population of Assam. Around 12 per cent of that is indigenous Muslim. Because of migration from Bangladesh, this group has lost its identity and are lagging behind in terms of social and political development.

• There are government schemes for indigenous communities in Assam like the Bodos, Koch Rajbongshis, Sooteas, Ahoms. Just like those are indigenous groups, so are Goriyas and Moriyas. Since Muslims world over have similar-sounding names, it is important to identify indigenous Assamese Muslims through a census, so that they can benefit from the various developmental schemes in Assam.

• This includes Clause 6 of the Assam Accord which grants “constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards” to the “Assamese people”. The report on its implementation is set to be submitted by the Centre-appointed high-powered committee soon. The census will help the indigenous Assamese Muslims benefit not just from Clause 6 but other schemes too.

• The census will “most probably” be carried out by the Omeo Kumar Das Institute of Social Change and Development, and will cover the entire state. The community has no benefits, no MLAs, no political representation. The rationale behind this is to help in the development of their identity, their culture, their literature.

Arguements against conducting a census

• Some fear such a census will “further marginalise” the descendants of Bengali-speaking migrants in Assam. The survey identifies one section of Muslims so that they can get certain benefits but ignores another section completely. The polarisation and divisions will automatically increase as a result of this.

• Also, how does one define an indigenous Assamese Muslim? Certain East Bengali-origin migrants have been living in Assam since the 1800s. Are they any less indigenous Assamese than other groups? If the government wants to really improve conditions of Muslims, why not do a survey/census of all economically deprived Muslims?