Editorials to be done

1.Persist with probe

2.Reality checks for the Opposition’s unity project
3.Testing the red lines in the Iran nuclear talks
4.Age and marriage
5.Can India become a technology leader?
6.Neither ban nor regulate crypto
7.The fight for Veda Nilayam
8.A strategic bulwark
9.Amid vaccine booster talk, context matters a lot
10.The quartet of hope
11.For Afghan women, it’s the great regression
12.The sustained attack on federalism
13.What rising inequality means
14.The row over boiled eggs
15.Thinking before linking
16.Changing the iconography of power
17.A foul cry
18.How the Code on Wages ‘legalises’ bonded labour
19.Stemming the onslaught of Omicron
20.Gabriel Boric’s acid test
21.A deeply insecure Union Territory
 20th Dec
1.Neither ban nor regulate crypto

Cryptocurrency
• Digital tokens
• People make direct payments - an online
system.
• Not legislated & no intrinsic value.
• Worth - willingness of the people to pay
• Contrast to national currencies - legislated as legal tender.
• Most well-known cryptocurrency - Bitcoin.
Trust in the society
• Nearly 15 million Indians - investing & betting
cryptocurrencies.
• Value oscillates - risks to investors & financial system.
• Private transaction between Indian adults with consent.
• Government is not involved.
• Hope that the value will keep rising and it will be accepted as valid medium of exchange.
• First requirement for any currency - trust.
• Trust built up by society or Govt’s inducement.
Writer’s opinion
• Government’s non Legitimization - dampen the enthusiasm for investment and speculation.
• All major nations - not accept cryptocurrencies as currencies.
• Value for cryptocurrency completely depends on the hope - medium of exchange or legal
tender.
Regulation of Currency
• Millions of investors - risky cryptocurrency trading
• Causes - losses, increase volatility, spur shadow finance and pose a systemic risk.
• Experts advice - regulation of cryptocurrencies.
• Only recognised financial instruments can be regulated.
• Ex: RBI regulates national currency of India - India Rupee
• Second requirement of any currency - Regulation.
Author’s opinion
• Regulation adviced for any currency - triggered by 2008 financial crisis - caused by mortgage
trading.
• Fear of a systemic risk lead to excessive financialisation, careless money supply and Wall
Street control of economic policy.
• Result - huge disparities in societies.
• Wall street control of economic policy
Wall street - stock market, bond market, commodities market, futures market & the foreign
exchange market.
Dangerous - Power to control the national economic policy
Extracts money without producing any real value.
• Situation - government recognises & regulates cryptocurrency
• Means providing official sanction to speculators - government protection.
• Leads to more people trading in cryptocurrencies
• Moral hazard - the author.
• India - no resources and governance capacity - set up a new regulatory infrastructure.
• Purpose of new regulatory infrastructure - oversee the interests of speculators gambling in
cryptocurrencies.
 21st Dec
1.A strategic bulwark

India Central Asia dialogue held

Among the issues discussed on Sunday were extending “immediate” humanitarian aid to
Afghanistan, increasing trade, and improving connectivity. It is significant that the CAR
Foreign Ministers chose to come to New Delhi, an indicator that India’s outreach to Central
Asia, a region neglected by South Block for several decades, is being reciprocated. The joint
statement, that they share a “broad regional consensus” on Afghanistan, is apt, given that, like
India, all the Central Asian neighbours of Afghanistan worry about the threat of terrorism,
radicalisation, narcotics, and refugees. However, unlike India, most of the CARs maintain
bilateral talks with the Taliban regime; Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan have reopened missions
there. Trade between India and Central Asia has long languished below $2 billion, with all
sides keen to grow this. In addition, India’s $1 billion Line of Credit for projects in Central
Asia, and connectivity initiatives such as Chabahar port, the International North-South
Transport Corridor and the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India gas pipeline were all
part of the dialogue.

Why is Central Asia important ?

✓ Important market
✓ Source for energy
✓ Bulwark against the threats of extremism and radicalisation.
✓ Traditional, historical and cultural links
✓ To counter the ‘Great Game’ rivalries playing out in the region
✓ Reclaim its shared history with countries
✓ Connect Central Asia policy in 2012.
✓ Maintains regular channels of communication through forums such as the Shanghai
Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and Conference on Interaction and Confidence-
Building Measures in India (CICA).
✓ Kazakhstan’s immense hydrocarbon reserves.
✓ Turkmenistan - enormous gas reserves, transit potential and geo-strategic location.
✓ Part of TAPI
✓ India is Close to the golden crescent - Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
✓ Drugs grown in Afghanistan are trafficked through Iran and Pakistan to the rest of the
world.
✓ Proximity to the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK)

Challenges in India Central Asia relations

1.Geopolitical cross-currents that complicate such efforts

2.While Russia continues to wield influence in the CAR governments, China’s Belt and Road
Initiative and $100 billion trade (by some estimates) have made it a central figure in the region.
The U.S. has also been seeking a foothold in the region, especially after Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, India’s land connectivity to Central Asia is hampered by Pakistan which is
building strong links and transit trade agreements with each of the CARs. The alternative route,
via Iran’s Chabahar, has received a setback after the Taliban takeover of Kabul, and the
development of the Indian-managed Shahid Beheshti terminal there continues to suffer due to
the threat of American sanctions.

2.Amid vaccine booster talk, context matters a lot

India needs a road map that includes COVID-19 testing, provision of care, financial
protection, and enhanced science communication with the general public to ensure sustained
adherence to COVID-19 appropriate behaviours , and other measures for protection against
disease to decrease further disruption by the pandemic. Discussions on boosters are essential,
but it is important that India makes its decisions based, as far as possible, on its own data.
High seropositivity, as shown in the fourth round of the National Sero-Prevalence Sur- vey,
different vaccines from the rest of the world, a different experience with the variants, all
indicate that India should not blindly follow the path adopted by other countries and it should
determine COVID-19 booster dose policy for the general population based on local evidence
and data. In epidemics and pandemics, context matters a lot.

3.The sustained attack on federalism

Prior to the pandemic, a series of steps by the Union government undermined the principles of
federalism, especially fiscal federalism. This manifested in the increasing monetary share of
the States in Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS), the terms of reference of the 15th Finance
Com- mission, imposition of demonetization without adequate consultation with the States,
institutionalization of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), outsourcing of the statutory functions
under the Smart Cities Mission, a delay in transfer of GST compensation, ‘One Nation One
Ration’, etc.
Besides tightening the purse strings of States, administrations also witnessed an onslaught on
the principles of federalism during the pan- demic. States were curtailed in aspects relating to
COVID-19 management such as procurement of testing kits, vaccination, the use of the
Disaster Management Act, and the un- planned national lockdown. Ironically, Union Ministers
used the ‘health is a State subject’ argument to counter criticism when the second wave caught
the government unprepared.
Several other policies initiated by the Union government in the recent past have also led to the
weakening of States’ autonomy. These include the farm laws; the Banking Regulation
(Amendment) Act of 2020; the Government of National Capital Territory Amendment Act,
2021; the Indian Marine Fisheries Bill, 2021; the Draft Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2020;
the Dam Safety Bill, 2019; the National Education Policy of 2020; and the Draft Blue Economy
policy. The creation of the Ministry of Cooperation and the Reserve Bank of India directives
on cooperatives are being perceived by the States as measures to strangulate a sector that is still
struggling to recover from the devastation of demonetisation.
These coercive policies, coming on top of the pandemic-induced eco- nomic shock, have
worsened the fiscal situation of State governments.
During the pandemic, the Union government repeatedly violated the compensation guarantees
to the States under the GST regime.
Delay in paying the States their due worsened the impact of the economic slowdown. The
crisis was aggravated in July 2020, when the Union government proposed borrowing as an
option to address the shortfall in GST compensation. Most States, forced by economic pressure,
had to accept the proposal. In effect, this meant that they were not only getting the share of
GST collections due to them, but were now forced into debt which they would have to service.
The GST compensation period expires in 2022, and despite multiple requests from the States,
the deadline has not been extended. The Comptroller and Auditor General found that the Un-
ion government, in 2018-19, wrongly retained ₹47,272 crore of GST compensation cess in the
Consolidated Fund of India — money that was sup- posed to be transferred to the States. It is
also pertinent to recollect that the 2021-22 Budget Estimates indicate that the States’ share of
Union tax has reduced to 30% against the mandated 41% devolution prescribed by the 15th
Finance Commission.
Cash-starved States have been seeking non-tax avenues to generate funds to sustain their
programmes. And at this point, the Union government issued a clarification that funding to the
Chief Minister’s Disaster Relief Funds will not be considered as CSR expenditure, unlike the
case with PM-CARES. This was followed by decisions like the suspension and transfer of the
Member of Parliament Local Area Development (MPLAD) funds to the Consolidated Fund of
In- dia. This led to a major crisis situation for most States and resulted in demands for
increasing borrowing limits under the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act
(FRBM), from 3% to 5%. The Union government decided to increase FRBM borrowing limits,
linking it to the performance of States in fulfilling certain conditions — implementation of the
One Nation, One Ration policy, ease of doing business reforms, ur- ban local body/utility
reforms and power sector reforms — making it dif- ficult for the States to perceive this as an
addressal of their concerns.
Solutions :
Another State-centric committee like the Rajamannar Committee to study Union-State
relations.
States should, as recommended by the National Commission to Review the Working of the
Constitution, demand the creation of a formal institutional framework to mandate and facilitate
consultation between the Union and the States in the areas of legislation under the Concurrent
List. State governments could also consider deploying human resources to support them in
preparing responses to the consultations initiated by the Union, especially with a focus on the
federalism angle.
Instead of reaching out to each other only during crisis situations, Chief Ministers should try
to create forums for regular engagement on this issue. Former Kerala Finance Minister had
rallied Finance Ministers from different States during the initial stages of discussion on the
terms of reference of the 15th Finance Commission. Similar efforts are required. This would
be crucial in the advocacy of major demands like the extension of GST compensation to 2027
and inclusion of cess in the divisible pool of taxes.
Federal flexibility — or the lack of it — is going to play a crucial role in shaping the future of
our democracy. The Union government needs to invest resources towards facilitating effective
consultation with States as a part of the lawmaking process. It is critical that the Union
establishes a system where citizens and States are treated as partners and not subjects.

4.The row over boiled eggs

Case study
The uproar following the Karnataka government’s decision to provide eggs along with mid-
day meals to students from Classes 1 to 8 in eight backward districts underscores the role of
food in not just nutrition but also in politics, religion and caste. After pressure from a section
of religious heads who demanded rollback on the inclusion of eggs, Karnataka’s Primary and
Secondary Education Minister said that the government is exploring protein-rich alternatives.
 22nd Dec

1.Thinking before linking

23rd Dec editorial :Why the electoral reforms Bill is a problem

Ignoring protests, the Union government has managed to push through a Bill in
Parliament to link electoral roll data with the Aadhaar ecosystem. On the face of it, the
Bill’s objective — to purify the rolls and weed out bogus voters — may appear
laudable, and the seeding of Aadhaar data with voter identity particulars may seem to
be a good way of achieving it. Indeed, this can also allow for remote voting, a measure
that could help migrant voters. The four qualifying dates for revision of rolls will help
in faster enrolment of those who turn 18. However, other aspects hold grave
implications for electoral democracy.
The amendment provides that an electoral registration officer may “require” an
individual to fur- nish their Aadhaar number in or- der to establish their identity. Even
persons already enrolled “may” be “required” by the officer to furnish their Aadhaar
numbers in order to authenticate their en- tries in the electoral roll. Regis- tered voters
have the option of providing their Aadhaar number to Government authorities. The
amendment states that no one shall be denied inclusion in the electoral roll, nor shall
their names be deleted from the electo- ral roll due to their inability to fur- nish the
Aadhaar number “due to such sufficient cause as may be prescribed”. Such individuals
may be allowed to furnish alternate documents, as prescribed by the Central
government.
Challenges
possible disenfranchisement of legitimate voters unwilling or unable to submit Aadhaar
details, the possible violation of privacy, and the possibility that demo- graphic details
may be misused for profiling of voters.
some electors may be registered in more than one constituency and that non-citizens
have been enrolled, but these can be ad- dressed by other identification processes. In
fact, the Aadhaar database may be irrelevant to verify voter identity because it is an
identifier of residents and not citizens. And the complaints of wrongful enrolment have
come up even against the unique identity number allotted to more than 90% of the
population.
he electoral officer clear- ly has uncanalised discretion — since the law does not
prescribe any guiding principles — to decide when an Aadhaar number may be
“required”. Moreover, the Central government has the final say in prescribing the
conditions (“suffi- cient cause”) under which an indi- vidual will be permitted to enter
or remain on the electoral rolls, in case of her “inability” to furnish their Aadhaar.
This means that the Central go- vernment will decide what rea- sons are considered
acceptable for a voter to remain on the electoral roll. Interestingly, the law does not
even consider a situation where an individual may be opposed to link- ing her Aadhaar
number to the electoral database — further un- dermining the voluntary premise of the
amendments.
In this manner, the burden of proof has been reversed. Instead of the Government
proactively en- suring registration on the electoral rolls (such as through house-to-
house verification) to achieve un- iversal adult franchise, the burden now shifts to
individuals who may be unable/unwilling to link their Aadhaar to justify their retention
on the rolls. In fact, deletion from the voter rolls will happen without any procedural
safeguards since at the moment, the law does not pro- vide for a right to a hearing before
such deletion.
the amendment will result in polit- ical profiling. By linking electoral IDs with Aadhaar
numbers, it is much easier for the Government to track which voter has accessed welfare
subsidies and benefits us- ing their Aadhaar. This can be used by political parties to
selec- tively target their messages to specific voters, using information that is not
publicly available.
Political profiling using Aadhaar data is not unheard of. In April 2021, the Madras High
Court asked
ough the Government has termed these measures as voluntary, the provisions of the
amendment be- lie this. The electoral officer clear- ly has uncanalised discretion —
since the law does not prescribe any guiding principles — to decide when an Aadhaar
number may be “required”. Moreover, the Central government has the final say in
prescribing the conditions (“suffi- cient cause”) under which an indi- vidual will be
permitted to enter or remain on the electoral rolls, in case of her “inability” to furnish
their Aadhaar.
This means that the Central go- vernment will decide what rea- sons are considered
acceptable for a voter to remain on the electoral roll. Interestingly, the law does not
even consider a situation where an individual may be opposed to link- ing her Aadhaar
number to the electoral database — further un- dermining the voluntary premise of the
amendments.

Burden of proof shifts

In this manner, the burden of proof has been reversed. Instead of the Government
proactively en- suring registration on the electoral rolls (such as through house-to-
house verification) to achieve un- iversal adult franchise, the burden now shifts to
individuals who may be unable/unwilling to link their Aadhaar to justify their retention
on the rolls. In fact, deletion from the voter rolls will happen without any procedural
safeguards since at the moment, the law does not pro- vide for a right to a hearing before
such deletion.
the Unique Identification Authori- ty of India (UIDAI) to ascertain how confidential
information held by it may have been leaked in light of “credible allegations” that only
mobile phones linked to Aadhar cards received bulk SMS messages to join WhatsApp
groups of a par- ticular political party during elec- tion campaigning in Puducherry.
Given these concerns, it is worry- ing that the amendment is con- spicuously silent in
reiterating the secret nature of such data or pro- hibiting the Election Commission of
India or any other agency from sharing such information.
Bogus voters
the Government has failed to pro- vide any empirical data that de- monstrates either the
extent of the problem of bogus voters in the
electoral roll or the suc- cess of Aadhaar in de-deduplica- tion. It is now well known
that the Aadhaar database is beset with er- rors and exclusions.

Each is a valid concern that ought to be considered by a parliamentary committee. it is

not clear if the specifics of the Bill had been discussed widely and public opinion
sought.There are also procedural con- cerns that relate to the manner in which the
amendment was passed. The Government intro- duced the Bill on December 20 and
passed it on the same day in the Lok Sabha, while pushing it through the Rajya Sabha
on the next date (December 21). Members of Parliament were not given time to
understand or debate the impli- cations of the amendments. Des- pite calls for division
of vote in both Houses, the law was passed on the basis of a voice vote. This undermines
the fundamental pre- mise of a parliamentary democra- cy — to allow elected
representa- tives the opportunity to voice the concerns of their constituents ov- er laws
that affect them.
the Election Laws (Amendment) Bill satisfies the tests laid down by the Supreme Court
— a permissible law, a legitimate state interest and proportionality. However, this has
to be rigorously examined.
how the Aadhaar project is once again being used for purposes far beyond the stated
“welfare” pur- pose that was upheld by the Su- preme Court of India in the Aad- haar
judgment as the basis for the introduction of the Aadhaar Act as a Money Bill in
Parliament.
Even though the Aadhaar requirement is said to be voluntary, in practice it can be made
mandatory. The Bill says the election registration officer may require the submission
of the Aadhaar number both for new enrolments and those already enrolled. The choice
not to submit is linked to a “sufficient cause”, which will be separately prescribed.
In 2015, media reports highlighted how lakhs of voters in Andhra Pradesh and
Telangana were reportedly excluded from the electoral process due to the practice of
linking Aadhaar num- bers with electoral ID. Right to In- formation replies indicated
that such deletion was carried out without any door-to-door verifica- tion of the identity
of individuals. The Supreme Court of India had to finally intervene to stop the linking
process since the constitutionality of the Aadhaar Act was under chal- lenge then.
If the Government really has no ulterior motive in the form of triggering mass deletions
from the electoral rolls, it must invite public opinion and allow deeper parliamentary
scrutiny before implementing the new provisions that now have the approval of both
Houses of Parliament.
One can only hope that unlike other issues such as electoral bonds that have been
pending for years, this challenge will be decided expeditiously. The success of our
democracy may ve- ry well depend on it.

2.How the Code on Wages ‘legalises’ bonded labour

Code on Wages, 2019 — gives legal sanction to bonded labour by allowing employers
to ex- tend limitless credit advances to their workers, and charge an un- specified (and
hence, usurious) interest rate on them.
Debt bondage is a form of slavery that exists when a worker is induced to accept
advances on wages, of a size, or at a level of interest, such that the advance will never
be repaid.
Comparison of the laws
Rule 21 of the Minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950 (corresponding to the Act) spelt
out certain ‘de- ductions’ permissible from the wages of workers. The sub-rule (2) (vi)
allowed for “deductions for recovery of advances or for adjustment of over payment of
wages, provided that such advances do not exceed an amount equal to wages for two
calendar months of the employed person”.
Additionally, it stated, “in no case, shall the monthly instalment of deduction exceed
one-fourth of the wages earned in that month”.
Compare this with Section 18(2) (f )(i) of the Code on Wages, which introduces two
major changes to the foregoing.
This section allows deductions from wages for the recovery of “advances of whatever
nature (including advances for travelling allowance or conveyance allowance), and the
interest due in respect thereof, or for adjustment of overpayment of wages”.
The subtle manipulations introduced have huge implications. One, it has done away
with the cap of ‘not more than two months’ of a worker’s wages under the earlier Act,
that an employer can give as advance. This allows employers to lend unlimited
advances to their workers, tightening their grip.
Two, it has legalised the charging of an interest rate by the employer on such advances,
by ad- ding the clause on interest, and with no details on what might be charged. The
net impact is an open sanction for the bonded la- bour system to flourish.
Moreover, the Code increases the permissible monthly deduction towards such
recovery, up to one-half of the worker’s monthly wage, as compared with one- fourth
under the earlier Act.
Implications of code on wages
1. No cap on advances.
2. Adding the clause on interest - legalised the charging of an interest rate by the
employer on such advances.
3. Increases monthly deduction allowed for such recovery to one-half of the
worker's monthly wage.
• Previous acts never prevented the bonded labour system from spreading.
􏰀Ex: large-scale primary survey in a mining cluster of Nagaur district, Rajasthan for
the Mine Labour Protection Campaign (2015).
􏰀 1 in 3 workers - taken advances of ₹1,000-₹1,50,000 at the time of joining
work.
􏰀 About 50% - to pay off the earlier employer or a moneylender.
• Most affected - Dalit and landless people.
Way forward
• Person should not be obliged to surrender his/her Constitutional rights as a
precondition to the acquisition of any privilege.
• Government intervention is crucial.
• Government must relook or repeal anti-labour laws.