The Hindu and PIB News Analysis 7-01-2025

We cover The Hindu news paper  today and PIB (press information bureau of India) Headlines which most impotant for UPSC, UPPPSC, BPSC, MPPPCS UTPCS, SSc CGL , Pre and mains and for banking RRB.

What in News in The Hindu and PIB News Analysis

Source: PIB Today 7-01-2025

What in News in PIB News Analysis 7-01-2025

Microsoft Chairman and CEO Satya Nadella meets Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi

Source: Posted: 06 Jan 2025 8:55PM by PIB Delhi

Microsoft Chairman and CEO Satya Nadella met Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi in New Delhi.
Shri Modi was delighted to learn about Microsoft’s ambitious expansion and investment plans in India. The two discussed various aspects of tech, innovation and AI in our meeting.

Responding to Satya Nadella’s post about the meeting, Shri Modi said.

“Satya Nadella, really glad to meet you! Glad to learn about Microsoft’s ambitious expansion and investment plans in India. It was also wonderful to discuss various aspects of tech, innovation and AI in our meeting.

India to host International Seminar to deliberate on Challenges and Innovations in Formalisation and Expansion of Social Security for Informal Workers

Technical Seminar in New Delhi on 20-21 January 2025 by Ministry of Labour and Employment in collaboration with International Social Security Association

Technical discussion of policy makers and experts from over 40 social security organizations from over 31 countries in the Asia Pacific region

Presentations by World Bank, ILO, UN India and ADB

Key Ministries Participating: Ministry of Finance, Ministry of External Affairs, NITI Aayog, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation

Participation of State/UT Governments

Insights and views of Industry Partners: CII, FICCI, ASSOCHAM, and NASSCOM

Formalisation and Social Security Coverage for Workers in the Informal Sector: Challenges and Innovations by Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, in collaboration with Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) and International Social Security Association (ISSA) A two-day technical seminar is being organized on the topic. The venue of the event is Yashobhoomi-India International Convention and Expo Centre, New Delhi-India.

The seminar will bring together policy makers, social security administrators, experts and practitioners from over 40 social security organizations from over 31 countries of the Asia Pacific region. They will share ideas, strategies and solutions for formalization of informal workers.

Key international organizations such as the World Bank, International Labour Organization (ILO), United Nations (India) and Asian Development Bank will also participate and share their insights and perspectives.

Key Stakeholders

The seminar will see participation from key ministries including Ministry of Finance, Ministry of External Affairs, NITI Aayog, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI). Industry partners such as CII, FICCI, ASSOCHAM and NASSCOM will also share their views and insights. States/UTs will also participate in the technical symposium.

Program Highlights

The first day will include inaugural session, technical discussions on formalization, flexible avenues of social protection for vulnerable workers (difficult to cover groups) and targeted incentives for them.

The second day will focus on providing social protection using digital solutions, communication strategies, gender equality and women empowerment through enhanced social protection coverage, strengthening data collection and reporting mechanisms, and medical care as a form of social protection.

What in News in The Hindu Editorial Analisys and News Analysis 7-01-2025

Source : The Hindu Newspaper Today 7-01-2025

​Down, but not out: On the Border-Gavaskar Trophy

On Sunday, a decade-long reign came to an end at the Sydney Cricket Ground. The Border-Gavaskar Trophy, the second biggest title in cricket after the Ashes and the biggest by viewership, has been held by India since 2015. Australia last won the title in the 2014-15 home series and India have since lifted the trophy on four occasions. This winning streak was broken after the end of the fifth Test in Sydney, which Pat Cummins and his team won by six wickets and clinched the series 3-1. This gap may indicate a huge gap in terms of ability between the two teams. But there was nothing of the sort and India had their moments and could have ended up on the winner’s podium. It was a series in which batsmen played second fiddle to the best fast bowlers. It was no surprise that when the most impressive of them all, Jasprit Bumrah, got injured and could not bowl during the Australian second innings in the last Test, the hosts cruised to victory. Bumrah started the series as captain, returning to the captaincy once regular skipper Rohit Sharma stepped down at the end of the match. And Bumrah topped the charts with 32 wickets. With yet another brilliant batting display, he also helped India avoid the follow-on at the Gabba in Brisbane.

The Collegium and changes — it may still be early days

Context

Two interesting developments have emerged in recent times about the functioning of the Collegium of the Supreme Court of India. As is often the case with the body’s procedures, reports in the media attribute the news of these decisions to unnamed sources. According to the report, the Collegium will now interview candidates who have been recommended for elevation as judges to the high courts. The panel will, as far as possible, exclude from the selection those whose close relatives have served or continue to serve as judges of the high courts or the Supreme Court.

Any meaningful reform of the collegium system is possible only if the government stops withholding proposals on arbitrary and often unknown grounds.

Introduction

According to The Hindu Editorial Two interesting developments have emerged in recent times about the functioning of the Collegium of the Supreme Court of India. As is often the case with the body’s processes, reports in the media attribute the news of these decisions to unnamed sources. According to the report, the Collegium will now interview candidates who have been recommended for elevation as judges to the high courts. The panel will, as far as possible, exclude from the selection those whose close relatives have served or continue to serve as judges of the high courts or the Supreme Court.

In themselves, none of these proposals may seem particularly remarkable.

One might think that appointments to important positions in the state – in this case, in the higher judiciary – would require careful deliberation, including meetings of the decision-makers with the nominated candidates.

One might also think that some degree of culling of nominees is inevitable in any process of selection.

The Collegium is aware that the move to exclude its relatives from the bench may leave out some deserving candidates, but it believes that on balance it will help diversify the judiciary.

Concerns still remain

• It is too early to assess the merits of the choices made.
• Over time these choices may be seen as harbingers of change and reform.
• For now, a well-known concern looms large, threatening to undermine the prospects of change.

Challenges to reforming the Collegium system

Any reform of the Collegium system will be possible only as long as the government continues to block proposals on arbitrary, whimsical and often idiosyncratic grounds.

• The Collegium system is the product of judge-made law, which puts it at a crossroads.
• There are no formal rules to bind the system, it is accountable to no one and its functioning is characterised by adhocism and ambiguity.
• Replacing the collegium system with a clear set of binding rules is essential to preserve its integrity.

There is a “Memorandum of Procedure”, but questions arise:

Are there any consequences for violating the manual?

Will the interview of candidates be written into the rules?

How will the collegium function under future Chief Justices of India (CJIs)?

75th anniversary of the Constitution

• On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution, much is said in praise of the text and vision of the Constitution.
• Its existence has revived a commitment to equality and social justice.
• However, the inability to determine the best way to appoint judges remains a lasting flaw.
• The makers of the Constitution debated the question of judicial appointments for days.

They were mindful of the fundamental ideas of a republic: the separation of powers between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.

Striving a balance between judicial independence and the sovereign function of making judicial appointments has always been a complex issue.

It was the ‘middle path’

Suggestions in the Constituent Assembly: Various suggestions were made in the Constituent Assembly regarding judicial appointments.

According to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the drafters chose to adopt the “middle path”.

Appointment of Judges: The Constitution provides that: Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President of India in consultation with the Chief Justice and such other Judges as the Chief Justice considers fit.

Judges of the High Courts are appointed by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice, the Governor of the State and the Chief Justice of the Court.

Transfer of judges between High Courts can be made by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice.

Lack of definition

• Though these provisions are clear, they fail to define:
• In what manner consultation should be made
• How transparent the process should be
• This lack of definition opened the provisions to judicial consideration.

Second Judges Case (1993)

• In the Second Judges Case (1993) the Court held that “consultation” should mean “concurrence”.
• Consent was required not only from the Chief Justice but also from a “collegium” of judges.
• This new process was intended to maintain fidelity to the text of the Constitution while ensuring an independent and autonomous judiciary.

The Collegium Process

• The Collegium, consisting of the Chief Justice and senior colleagues, will make recommendations for:
• Appointment of judges to the High Courts or the Supreme Court
• Transfer of judges between High Courts
• Election of a new Chief Justice to a High Court
• The Collegium makes these recommendations after consulting the “consultant” judges.

The Central Government may:

• Accept the proposal
• Return the proposal for reconsideration
• If reconsidered and resubmitted, the government must approve the proposal.

Challenges in the process

• The process sounds simple, but there are no binding rules with it.
• The government can withhold recommendations it considers inconvenient by:
• Keeping the proposal pending
• Stopping the Presidential warrant authorising the appointment or transfer before it is issued.

The paradox of primacy

• In theory, the Collegium has primacy over judicial appointments.
• However, the government’s ability to withhold recommendations means that the question of primacy is redundant.
• In the Fourth Judges Case (2015), the Court emphasised that only the judiciary should have primacy, and any interference would impinge on the basic structure of the Constitution.

Judges’ Cases and the Rule of Law

• Whatever our position on the constitutional suitability of the Collegium, it represents the rule of law at present.
• The government is legally bound to follow the procedure laid down in judges’ cases and has no discretion in the matter.
• When the government sits endlessly on recommendations or opposes proposals by failing to act, it is effectively obstructing the legal process.

The need for reform and accountability

There is no doubt that until we find a process that balances accountability with independence, it will remain important to adopt meaningful reforms within the existing system.

• The law as it is must be followed.
• The Collegium’s latest proposals address some long-standing concerns over its processes, but implementation remains a key issue.

The Court’s role in ensuring compliance

So far, while the Court has occasionally asked the government to take action when it fails to act on a proposal, it has refrained from issuing explicit directions for compliance.
The Court may have avoided such orders to prevent them from being seen as unnecessarily confrontational.
After all, in such cases, the goal is to have the various wings of the state work together to ensure that the process is completed.

Conclusion

But to maintain the primacy of the collegial system, and to preserve its stated purpose – the independence of our judiciary – due deference must be given to the decisions of judges in cases. The Court’s ability to act as a counter-majoritarian institution depends as much on its ability to declare law as on its ability to ensure that law is obeyed. As Chief Justice Coke said in 1611, succinctly summarizing the essence of the rule of law, “The King has no prerogative, except what the law of the country allows him to do.”