26 June 2023

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS ANALYSIS

1 – Skin Bank: GS III – Biotechnology-related issues

Context:

• North India’s first skin bank opens in Safdarjung Hospital.

Key details:

The country has 16 skin banks:

• seven in Maharashtra,
• four in Chennai,
• three in Karnataka, and
• one each in Madhya Pradesh and Odisha.

Understanding skin donation:

• Skin is the largest organ in the body.
• Like any other organ, it can also be donated and transplanted.
• Skin graft
• The skin has two main layers:
• the outer epidermis and
• the inner dermis.
• Only 0.3mm thickness of the skin is harvested.

Sources of grafts:

• Autografts (a patient’s own skin) and
• Allograft or homografts (skin taken from a deceased donor or cadavers, relatives and other human beings) are two common sources of grafts.
• Benefits:
• Effective control of protein and fluid loss from wounds
• Reversal of the hypermetabolic state, leading to improved nutritional status
• Control of wound infection and enhancement of the wound bed, preparing it for the acceptance of vital skin autografts
• Biological wound coverage until the autograft donor sites are ready for reharvesting, greatly minimizing protein loss, exudation, and pain.

More about skin banks:

• In a bank, the cadaveric skin is harvested from a donor’s body, packaged, and stored under optimal conditions.
• The bank provides the same stored skin to be reused as a graft in patients with severe burn injuries.
• Skin is generally preserved in 85 percent glycerol solution and stored at a temperature between 4-5 degree Celsius for a period of up to 5 years. This provides more flexibility to surgeons who can use it for various burn cases.

Who can be a donor?

• Unlike kidney, liver, or bone marrow transplants, skin transplants do not require a blood or tissue match between the donor and recipient.
• Healthy skin from any individual can be used for anyone in need.

The current state of skin banks in India:

• For a population of approximately 1.43 billion, the current number of skin banks  are bit sufficient.
• The first skin bank for deceased donors was founded in Mumbai in 2000.
• Then in 2009, an effective skin bank model was created through a partnership between the National Burns Centre Mumbai, Rotary International, and Euro Skin Bank which began operating in 2013.
• The wide acceptance of this model led to the subsequent promotion of skin banks in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Maharashtra.

Challenges:

Gap in demand and supply:

• There is a huge gap in demand and supply of the required allograft skin, with more and more skin banks needed in various parts of India.

Lack of awareness:

• The doctors themselves are not aware of the benefits of skin banking.

Tackling religious beliefs:

• Fighting society and convincing people that skin banking does not go against any religion and is for the benefit of other patients which by itself is the cornerstone of any religion.

Breaking taboos, myths, and false beliefs:

• Fighting the belief that cadavers will be disfigured and maimed after the skin donation.
• Finding suitable institutions doing a fair bit of acute burn care and interested in working hard with no or little monetary returns.

Infrastructural development:

• Setting up the infrastructure in terms of equipment and trained personnel.
• Maintaining high standards and quality management of the skin bank and following and adhering to the approved international protocols and standard operating procedures.

Way forward:

• Skin donation banks play a vital role in providing life-saving treatment for burn victims and patients with severe skin injuries.
• The process of skin donation and transplantation offers a chance at recovery and improved quality of life for those who suffer from extensive skin damage.
• However, despite the increasing number of skin banks across India and successful collaboration between various organizations, there is still a significant gap between the demand for and supply of allograft skin.
• To address this issue, it is essential to raise awareness about skin donation, promote the establishment of more skin banks, and encourage collaboration between medical professionals, researchers, and the public.

Source The Hindu

2 – Draft livestock and livestock products Bill: GS II – Government Policies and Interventions

Context:

• The Centre has withdrawn the proposed draft of the Live-stock and Live-stock Product (Importation and Exportation) Bill, 2023.

About the Bill:

• The Bill is meant to replace the Live-stock Importation Act, 1898, and the Live-stock (Amendment) Act, 2001.
• It frames guidelines for the import and export of live animals, which has raised concerns among animal lovers.

How is it different?

It is different from the existing law in three key aspects:

• it allows export of live animals.
• it widens the scope of animal import-export (including cats and dogs among ‘live-stock’).
• it takes away some powers of state governments to regulate this area.
• The earlier law regulates only importation of live-stock, while the proposed draft Bill has provisions to regulate live-stock exports also.
• The Bill provides the government the power to make arrangements for promotion and development of exports of live-stock and live-stock products.
• The proposed draft has expanded the definition of live-stock to include feline and canines also.
• The proposed draft Bill defines the live-stock as all equines, bovines, caprines, ovines, swines, canines, felines, avian, laboratory animals, aquatic animals and any other animal which may be specified by the Central Government, except those prohibited in any other act.
• The Centre has defined the live-stocks and live-stock products as commodity in the proposed draft Bill.

Arguments in favour of the law:

• The present law, Live-stock Importation Act, 1898 that regulates import of live-stock is 125 years old.
• The aim is to align it with the contemporary requirements and prevailing circumstances related to sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures, and its extant Allocation of Business Rules, 1961.

2001 amendment:

• In 2001, the then NDA government had amended the 1898 law.
• One of the key changes in the law was inclusion of the import of livestock products.
• The earlier law dealt with only the import of live-stock.

According to the amendment live-stock products were also included:

• The 2001 amendment also empowered the Centre to regulate, restrict or prohibit the trade of any live-stock product that may be liable to affect human or animal health.

Arguments against the Bill:

• Animal rights organisations have said that the draft Bill will open a Pandora’s Box of cruelties on animals.
• The proposed Livestock and Livestock Products [Importation and Exportation] Bill is a blanket free pass for the abuse of millions of animals farmed for food and other uses.
• According to 2021 figures released by the United Nations, almost 2 billion of the 80 billion land animals raised for food around the world are exported alive to different countries.

Way forward:

• The Centre has withdrawn the Bill for now.
• Enough time is required to understand the proposed draft.
• The representations have been made expressing concerns on the proposed draft involving sensitivity and emotions with animal welfare and related aspects, and, hence, would need wider consultation.

Source The Hindu

3 – What is a Guinness World Record: GS II – Current related issues

Context:

• Prime Minister of India led yoga session at United Nations headquarters, on the occasion of 9th International Yoga Day, created a Guinness World Record for participation of people of most nationalities in a yoga event.

About Guinness World Records:

• Guinness World Records (originally known as the Guinness Book of Records) documents record-breaking achievements of all kinds.
• It lists world records both of human achievements and the extremes of the natural world.
• How does one make a Guinness World Record?
• Today, GWR has over 75 adjudicators across the world, who determine whether a record has been broken or not.
• One can apply to invite an adjudicator to witness a record being broken.

Criteria:

A record must satisfy all of the following criteria to count:

• It should be objectively measurable.
• It should be breakable – it cannot be something so unique that only one person can do it.
• It should also be standardisable with a possibility to create a set of parameters and conditions that all challengers can follow.
• It should be verifiable.
• It should be based on only one variable.
• It should be the best in the world.

Criticisms:

• GWR has orientated its business model toward inventing new world records as publicity stunts for companies and individuals.
• GWR is criticied for taking money from authoritarian governments for pointless vanity projects.
• Encouraging people to partake in risky activities.

Source The Hindu

4 – The New Collective Quantified Goal: GS III – Environmental Conservation

Context:

• Along with climate finance, a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) was on the table for deliberations at COP27.

Key details:

• The recently-concluded Bonn climate conference in Germany was expected to outline the political agenda for the end-of-year Conference Of Parties-28 (COP28) in Dubai.
• It was critical for reviewing and reforming the climate finance architecture.

About NCQG:

• A commitment of ‘$100 billion per year till 2020 to developing nations from developed countries was a target set at the Conference of Parties (COP) in 2009.
• The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement agreed on setting a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCGQ) for climate financing prior to 2025.
• The NCGQ is termed the most important climate goal.

Focus areas:

• It pulls up the ceiling on commitment from developed countries,
• It is supposed to anchor the evolving needs and priorities of developing countries based on scientific evidence and
• It should respond to the ever-increasing sums of funding necessary for Loss and Damage in response to failed and/or delayed financial support.

About Paris Climate Agreement:

• The Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change.
• It was adopted by 196 Parties at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris, on 12 December 2015.
• It entered into force on 4 November 2016.

Aim:

• To hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
• For the first time, a binding agreement brings all nations together to combat climate change and adapt to its effects.
• The Paris Agreement works on a five-year cycle of increasingly ambitious climate action.
• Since 2020, countries have been submitting their national climate action plans, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs).

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs):

• In their NDCs, countries communicate actions they will take to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in order to reach the goals of the Paris Agreement.
• Countries also communicate in their NDCs actions they will take to build resilience to adapt to the impacts of climate change.

Long-Term Strategies:

• The Paris Agreement invites countries to formulate and submit long-term low greenhouse gas emission development strategies (LT-LEDS).
• LT-LEDS provide the long-term horizon to the NDCs.
• Unlike NDCs, they are not mandatory.

How are countries supporting one another?

Finance:

• The Paris Agreement reaffirms that developed countries should take the lead in providing financial assistance to countries that are less endowed and more vulnerable.

Technology:

• It establishes a technology framework to provide overarching guidance to the well-functioning Technology Mechanism.

Capacity-Building:

• The Paris Agreement places great emphasis on climate-related capacity-building for developing countries and requests all developed countries to enhance support for capacity-building actions in developing countries.

Need for a new finance goal:

• Out of the promised $100 billion per year, developed countries provided $83.3 billion in 2020, as per a report.
• These figures may be misleading and inflated by as much as 225 as there is too much dishonest and shady reporting.
• The $100 billion target set in 2009 was seen more as a political goal, since there was no effort to clarify the definition or source of ‘climate finance’.
• The economic growth of developed countries has come at the cost of high carbon emissions, and thus they are obligated to shoulder greater responsibility.
• While funds available for climate finance have quantitatively increased, they are inaccessible, privately sourced, delayed and not reaching countries in need.
• A recent study found roughly 5% of climate finance comes from grants, the rest through loans and equity which burden developing countries with a debt crisis.
• Countries most in need of finances have to wait years to access money and pay interest at high rates, thus increasing their debt burden.

Arguments of the developed countries:

• Developed countries argue that NCQG must be viewed as a “collective goal” for all developed and developing countries.
• This argument is a cause of worry as it pushes the “net zero” pathways onto developing countries, which cannot feasibly pay for mitigation, adaptation, loss and damage, along with sustainably developing key elements of infrastructure.
• Countries also argue for mobilising private-sector investments and loans as the critical component of climate finance.

Way forward:

• Countries are on a tight deadline to agree upon the NCQG ahead of 2024.
• A global transition to a low-carbon economy requires investments of at least $4 trillion to $6 trillion a year, as per last year’s Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan.
• Instead of identifying a single aggregate figure, the NCQG could also set separate targets (or sub-goals) for focus areas such as mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage.

The aim is to focus on:

• scaling up concessional financing.
• stopping debt creation and
• allowing NCQG to be more of a process rather than a goal towards equitable and people-led transition.

Source The Hindu

5 – Delhi Statehood Debate: GS II – Federalism-related issues

Context:

• The Supreme Court delivered a unanimous verdict recently in favour of the Delhi government on who should control the bureaucracy in the national capital.

About the SC verdict:

• As per the ruling of the Constitution Bench, the government of Delhi possesses the authority to enact laws and oversee civil services in the national capital.
• The court restricted the jurisdiction of the Lieutenant Governor (LG) to bureaucrats in three distinct domains:
• public order,
• police, and

Government’s response:

• After the verdict, the central government brought in the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Ordinance, 2023.

The characteristics of the Ordinance are:

• The Ordinance was enacted to institute the National Capital Civil Services Authority, which is tasked with providing recommendations to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi regarding the services under Group A of All India Services (excluding the Indian Police Service), and Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar, Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli (Civil) Services.
• transfers and postings.
• vigilance, disciplinary proceedings.
• prosecution sanctions.
• The Lieutenant Governor (LG) is authorised to exercise discretion in matters that fall outside the legislative competence of the Delhi Legislative Assembly.
• But these matter should have been delegated to the LG, or
• In matters where the LG is required by law to act in his discretion or perform any judicial or quasi-judicial functions.

Arguments in favour of statehood for Delhi:

Statehood as per the constitutional mandate:

• The Central government is overstepping its jurisdiction in opposition-ruled states by using the posts of Governor and Lieutenant Governor to destabilise governments.
• In terms of constitutional exactitude, the Assembly is elected in a manner akin to that of a State, and the executive is invariably accountable to the legislative.
• As per the Constitution, the LG is vested with the authority to govern matters pertaining to public order, police, and land.
• The remaining entities included in the State List are subject to the jurisdiction of the respective State government.
• This implies that the Assembly possesses the power to enact legislation pertaining to the remaining subjects, and its jurisdiction over said matters is absolute.
• Delhi can be considered analogous to a state.

Statehood will reduce the dominance of the LG:

• The Central government introduced a modification to the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991 in 2021 conferring dominance to the Lieutenant Governor over the democratically elected government.
• As per the aforementioned, the government is obligated to direct any legislation enacted by the Assembly to the LG.
• The revised legislation stipulates that the viewpoint of the Lieutenant Governor (LG) is obligatory for all executive measures and upholds the LG’s authority to withhold any Act or issues beyond the jurisdiction of the Assembly for further review.
• The additional provisions of the Parliament are not capable of circumventing the constitutional provision and conferring greater authority to the Central government beyond the limits prescribed by the Constitution.

Against the Constitutional tenets:

• It is incongruous with the constitutional framework established for Delhi.
• As per Achary’s analysis, the amendment contravened both the textual and conceptual tenets of the Constitution, and lacks legitimate constitutional authorization.
• The fundamental role of the legislature cannot be abrogated.

Statehood will give more representation to the people of Delhi:

• During the year 1991, the establishment of the Legislative Assembly of Delhi through the 69th Amendment of the Constitution took place when the population of the city was comparatively less.
• Presently, the population of Delhi is approximately twenty million individuals.
• In no democratic system is a government with such limited powers as this is able to represent a population of two crore individuals.
• The current system is deemed inadequate as it no longer caters to the needs of Delhi’s growing population.
• Thus, the attainment of statehood for Delhi is deemed necessary.

Arguments Against Delhi Statehood:

Parliament’s power is supreme:

• Delhi doesn’t become a State just because of the nomenclature as Chief Minister, Cabinet, etc.
• Parliament reserves the ability to replace any law approved by the Delhi Assembly in accordance with the requirements of Article 239 AA.
• According to Article 239 each UT shall be administered by the President through a Lieutenant Governor.
• Legislative bodies have also been granted in several UTs, albeit only for symbolic purposes.

Delhi’s Chief Minister is a toothless tiger:

• He is not permitted to convene a Cabinet meeting without the LG’s consent or to make any decisions without the LG’s consent.
• Any official may have files ordered directly by the LG.
• A Chief Secretary is required to follow the written guidelines.
• As a result, the elected system in Delhi is meant to serve as an advisor to the LG on their behalf as they administer the government.
• Technically, it is not allowed to be a ruler under the constitution.

Important institutions are located in Delhi:

• Important institutions like the Parliament, the President’s estate, and foreign embassies are located in Delhi.
• These institutions fall under the exclusive control of the Union Government, not a specific state legislative body.
• In addition, a lot of prominent foreign dignitaries attend summits and international missions in Delhi.
• The federal government is also in charge of planning these missions and making sure their smooth execution.
• As a result, there is a compelling case against shifting Delhi’s administration from the centre to the state.

Opposition from regional parties:

• Numerous regional parties have declared their adamant opposition to granting Delhi full statehood.
• They believe that the national capital of India belongs to all of its residents, not just those who live in the city.
• The idea of sharing authority with the state government, which may potentially intrude upon their privileges has caused central ministers and members of parliament to publicly voice their displeasure a number of times.
• Delhi would lose numerous benefits from serving as the nation’s capital if it became a state.

The Way Forward:

• The apex court had rightly concluded that the scheme set out in the Constitution and the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991 envisages a collaborative structure that can be worked only through constitutional trust.
• Subsidiarity is the foundational principle of fiscal federalism which necessitates empowered sub-national governments.
• Therefore, the central government should move towards allocating greater powers to city governments.
• India should emulate several large megapolis around the globe, from Jakarta and Seoul to London and Paris, which have had strong sub-national governments.

Source The Hindu