MAINS DAILY QUESTIONS & MODEL ANSWERS
Q1. The DART mission made headlines recently. What is it? In what ways will it prove advantageous to humanity?
GS III – Science and Technology
Introduction:
- To show off defence against space debris and asteroids striking Earth, NASA carried out the first-ever Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) on the target asteroid, Dimorphos, in space. The test was successfully completed.
- NASA’s DART satellite mission is designed to test a planetary defence strategy against near-Earth objects. A technological procedure is used to change the course of an item (such as an asteroid, meteoroid, etc.) that is headed towards Earth. It attempts to achieve this by slowing down the object, changing its orbit, or changing its momentum, therefore preventing future impacts with the earth.
To what extent does it benefit humanity?
- Protection from large asteroids that could eventually cause extinction. For instance. The demise of the dinosaurs was caused by a large object striking Earth in the distant past.
- Redirecting small objects that are predicted to impact Earth in the future successfully will guarantee little to no loss of life for people, businesses, or ecosystems.
- DART’s accuracy and readiness will improve space capabilities to address other issues like space debris removal.
- Future investigations of both affected asteroids (Dimorphos) will be carried out in-depth by the European Space Agency’s Hera project, with special attention paid to the crater caused by DART’s collision and an accurate determination of Dimorphos’ mass.
- DART thus proves to be a fitting illustration of how technology can be used to advance humankind’s welfare.
Q2. There is a lack of transparency in the selection procedure for judges and the Chief Justice of India. Examine. What further obstacles exist in the appointment-making process?
GS III – Judiciary related issues
Introduction:
- According to Article 124 of the Indian Constitution, the president selects people to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and justices to the supreme court. The president makes these appointments based on the collegium’s recommendations. The Supreme Court’s numerous rulings in judge inquiry cases are what gave rise to the collegium system and its evolution.
Transparency issues:
- In the Third Judges Case (1998), the collegium was increased to five members, comprising the Chief Justice and the four seniormost judges in terms of Supreme Court nominations. Additionally, the Supreme Court recognised the collegium as an essential component of the constitution in the case of the Fourth Judge (2015).
- Because the characteristics and selection criteria used to determine the compatibility of different judges are unclear, the general public is unaware of them. In the public’s perspective, it causes problems with credibility and lack of openness.
- The choice to suggest names is made in private, behind closed doors, which is in opposition to the principles of openness.
- Due to procedural complexity, the Law Minister receives the names proposed by the Collegium and forwards them to the Prime Minister for the President’s advice. It leads to a lack of coordination and miscommunication between the court and the executive branch.
- Visible disagreement among collegium members over judge nominations demonstrates a lack of consensus in decision-making, which further damages the process’s legitimacy.
Additional obstacles in the scheduling process:
- Excessively long wait times for appointments since the administration takes years to implement the collegium’s recommendations for judges. It causes the entire process of appointing judges to become paralysed.
- Concern should be expressed about the lack of personnel and open positions in the already overworked judiciary. In the higher judiciary, there have been over 33% of vacancies over time.
- Lack of accountability stems from the fact that the legislative, the executive branch, and the general public do not hold the collegium accountable for its judgements.
- Judges’ suitability for judicial behaviour is called into doubt by the judiciary’s declining credibility brought on by accusations of sexual harassment against previous Chief Justices.
- The government offers former judges post-retirement posts and offices, which creates concerns among the general public because they create opportunities for political meddling and nepotism.
- The appointment procedure becomes more politicised when conventions regarding the top position being held by the senior most judge are abandoned. Furthermore, the collegium system is frequently criticised for not assigning the most senior judges and lawyers to the appropriate position.
- A big worry is that there is no consistency in the decision-making process over time due to the lack of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the appointment procedure and no time constraint for decision-making.
- For the appointment of judges, a transparent method, qualitative tools, and an objective approach are required. To ensure a quicker, more equitable, and transparent process to reinforce the robust foundation of the Indian judiciary, the executive and judiciary will collaborate.
