10 December 2022

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS ANALYSIS

1 – FALKLAND DISPUTE: GS II – International Relations

What is the specific issue:

• In 1765, the British were the first to settle in West Falkland, but in 1770, the Spanish drove them out.
• The British garrison on West Falkland was rebuilt in 1771 after a threat of war, but they withdrew from the island for economic reasons in 1774, without renouncing their claim to the Falklands.
• Spain had a foothold on East Falkland until 1811. (which it dubbed Soledad Island).
• Argentina’s government declared sovereignty over the Falkland Islands in 1820, after gaining independence from Spain in 1816.
• In 1841, the British assigned a civilian lieutenant governor to the Falklands.
• In February 1982, Argentina’s military government launched an attack on the Falkland Islands. As a result of this deed, the Falkland Islands War began.
• When Argentine forces surrendered at Stanley to British troops who had forcibly retaken the islands, the conflict came to an end.
• In a referendum in March 2013, islanders overwhelmingly chose to remain a British overseas territory.
• Despite wars and UN deliberations, the issue of sovereignty remains a point of contention.

 Location:

• The Falkland Islands are a British overseas territory off the coast of South America in the southwest Atlantic Ocean.
• This planet can be found in both the southern and western hemispheres of the Earth.
• The Malvinas Islands are another name for them.

Source The Hindu

2 – ANTI DEFECTION LAW: GS II – Election-Related Issues

Challenges:

• Despite the fact that there is legislation in place, politicians continue to switch parties.
• Speakers, chairpersons, and the courts have dragged out anti-defection cases for years.
• The statute is unclear on the deadline for action by the House Chairperson or Speaker in anti-defection cases.

Anti-defection legislation is defined as follows:

 It is covered by the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution:

• It explains the conditions in which a legislator’s change of political party results in legal action being taken.
• It was inserted to the Constitution by the 52nd Amendment Act of 1985.
• It also applies to situations in which an independent MLA joins a political party after winning an election.

The statute offers the following options in the event that an MP or MLA switches political parties. Here are a few examples:

• When a member elected on the ticket of a political party “voluntarily gives up” party membership or votes in the House against the wishes of the party.
• When an independent candidate wins a legislative seat and then joins a political party afterward.
• A lawmaker’s place in the legislature is forfeited when he or she switches (or joins) a political party.
• Nominated MPs have six months after being nominated to join a political party, according to the law. They risk losing their House seat if they join a political party after that period.

concerns about disqualification:

• The anti-defection statute gives the presiding officer of the legislature the ability to rule on an MP’s or MLA’s disqualification.
• The Act does not specify a time limit for making such a decision.
• Last year, the Supreme Court determined that anti-defection accusations should be settled by Speakers within three months.

Legislators, on the other hand, can change parties without risking being disqualified in specific circumstances. Exceptions:

• If at least two-thirds of a political party’s legislators support the merger, the legislation allows the party to merge with or into another.
• If a member freely gives up his or her political party membership after being elected as the House’s presiding officer, he or she will not be disqualified.

Loopholes in the law:

• Opponents contend that in elections, voters elect individuals rather than parties, and hence the Anti-Defection Law is ineffectual.
• The Speaker (usually a member of the ruling party) has postponed the disqualification judgement in a number of occasions.
• The amendment does not recognise a’split’ in a legislature party; instead, it recognises a’merger.’

Is there any way for the courts to get involved:

• Courts have gotten engaged in the legislative process in some cases.
• A five-judge Supreme Court constitutional panel held in 1992 that the Speaker’s anti-defection statute proceedings are equivalent to tribunal proceedings and hence open to judicial review.
• In January 2020, the Supreme Court ordered Parliament to amend the Constitution, taking away the only authority of legislative assembly speakers to decide whether or not parliamentarians should be disqualified under the anti-defection provision.
• After disqualification petitions against him had been pending before the speaker since 2017, the Supreme Court ousted Manipur minister Thounaojam Shyamkumar Singh from the state government in March 2020, restraining him “from attending the legislative assembly until further orders.”

Suggestions:

• In circumstances of defection, the Election Commission has proposed that it be the deciding authority.
• Defection petitions, according to some, should be heard by the President and Governors.
• The Supreme Court has suggested that Parliament create an independent panel to decide defection cases quickly and equitably, overseen by a retired judge from the higher judiciary.
• The law, according to some commentators, has failed and should be repealed. It only applies in no-confidence resolutions to save governments, according to former Vice President Hamid Ansari.

Source The Hindu

3 – ARUNACHAL PRADESH ASSAM BORDER DISPUTE: GS III – Internal Security Related Issues

 The origins of the Assam-Arunachal Pradesh boundary dispute are as follows:

• Boundary disputes have arisen in each of the north-eastern states that arose from Assam.
• Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram were separated from Assam as Union Territories in 1972, and later as States in 1987.
• None of the new states recognised the “constitutional boundary” that they alleged was set by the partisan administration of undivided Assam without consultation with tribal stakeholders.
• The issue with Arunachal Pradesh derives from a 1951 study prepared by a sub-committee led by Assam’s first Chief Minister, Gopinath Bordoloi.

The squabble:

• Arunachal Pradesh and Assam are at conflict over 1,200 sites along their 804-kilometer border.

 Attempts to reconcile the disagreement include the following:

• The Supreme Court created a local border commission in 2006, which was chaired by one of the court’s retired judges.
• In its September 2014 report, the committee recommended that Arunachal Pradesh be handed back some of the land it was given in 1951, as well as pushing both governments to reach a middle ground through negotiation. This turned out to be a bad decision.

Source The Hindu

 4 – INVASIVE SPECIES IN WESTERN GHATS:GS III – Environmental Conservation Related Issues

Concerns:

• By displacing native flora, the invasive plant has now spread over the Western Ghats’ most famous wildlife areas, wreaking havoc on elephant, deer, gaur, and tiger habitats.
• Due to the species’ allelopathic qualities, no other plants can grow under it. Allelopathy is a biological phenomenon in which one or more biochemicals produced by one organism have an impact on the germination, growth, survival, and reproduction of other organisms.
• On the ground, this has a considerable impact on primary productivity. The forest floor is practically bare under the invading species. When grasses and herbs are entirely destroyed, herbivores are left without food.
• The carrying capacity of forests to maintain wildlife is fast declining as a result of the invasion, hastening man-animal conflict.

Attempts to eliminate them include:

• Uprooting, girdling, chopping, slicing tree limbs, and even testing the use of chemicals to destroy trees were all tried by the Kerala Forest Department. However, all of the efforts were in vain. Instead, coppice shoots emerged from the stumps of the trees that had been felled. The situation is similar in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.

Invading species have the following characteristics:

• Invasive alien species are non-native plants, animals, illnesses, and other critters that can endanger an ecosystem’s economics, environment, or human health.
• They have a negative impact on biodiversity, causing native species to become extinct due to competition, predation, or pathogen transmission, as well as disrupting local ecosystems and ecological processes.

The following are the consequences of invasive species:

• Biodiversity is vanishing.
• Natural resources are becoming increasingly limited and of poorer quality.
• There is a lack of water.
• Flooding and wildfires are becoming increasingly regular.
• Pollution has resulted from the overuse of insecticides to manage infestations.

Efforts in this area include the following:

• The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) acknowledges the pressing need to address the effects of invasive species.
• Aichi Biodiversity Target 9 and one sentence of UN Sustainable Development Goal 15 – Life on Land – specifically address the issue.
• The IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) aims to reduce threats to ecosystems and native species by increasing knowledge of techniques to avoid, contain, or destroy invasive species.
• The IUCN has created two information platforms: the Global Invasive Species Database (GISD) and the Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species (GRAIS) (GRIIS).

Source The Hindu