Today in History (14^th May 1992)

On May 14, 1992, India issued a ban on the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), commonly known as the Tamil Tigers, a Sri Lankan rebel group.

Let’s revise

A) Which one is the correct statement about Indian Politics

1. It is free from caste and religious biases
2. It is mainly affected by the freebees
3. It is not affected by the freebees
4. Region, religion, and caste have no role in Indian politics

Ans. (b)

B) Vibrant Village Programme is being implemented by which ministry?

1. Ministry of finance
2. Ministry of panchayatiraj
3. Ministry of Urban affairs
4. Ministry of Home affairs

Ans. (d)

C) What is the main objective of Vibran Village Programme?

1. To develop all villages independent for financial resources
2. To develop roads in all villages of India
3. To develop roads in the villages of border areas along the Chinese border
4. To develop basic infrastructure in the villages near National capital

Ans. (c)

D) Recently Web eraser tool was in news. It is associated with which company?

1. Samsung
2. Apple
3. Microsoft
4. Tesla

Ans. (b)

E) Two temple boards in Kerala have banned use of ______ flowers in temple offerings. It was due to the death of a 24-year old woman after accidentally chewing some leaves of this plant. Fill in the blank.

1. Marigold
2. Lily
3. Lavender
4. Oleander

Ans. (d)

F) According to the World Happiness Report 2024 which country is at the bottom?

1. Pakistan
2. Afghanistan
3. Finland
4. India

Ans. (b)

G) What is the rank of India in world happiness index 2024?

1. 114
2. 126
3. 108
4. 140

Ans. (b)

Summary of Today’s News

Notice by the Supreme Court on petition questioning collegium for selection of judges for Himachal HC

• The Supreme Court has asked for a response from the Registrar General of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. This is in regard to a plea by two senior District and Sessions Judges. The judges allege that their merit and seniority were ignored by the HC Collegium in selecting names for HC judgeship.
• The petitioners are Chirag Bhanu Singh and Arvind Malhotra, judges at Bilaspur and Solan respectively. They claim their names were not considered.

An overview of the Smart Cities Mission

• Smart cities were defined by urban practitioners as new Silicon Valleys built with a strong integration of a network of airports, highways, and other types of communications, a so-called intellectual city with advanced ICT.
• The Urban Ministry’s dashboard as of April 26, exhibits that 8,033 projects sanctioned under the SCM have seen a fall in the total outlay from the expected ₹2 lakh crore to ₹1,67,875 crore, which is 16% less than the projected capital flow in 100 cities.
• The SCM became an exclusionary scheme wherein not more than 1% of a city’s geographical area was selected for development. The scheme was divorced from ground realities of urban India.
Reasons behind non performance of Smart Cities Mission
• far away from ground realities
• lack of cooperation with urban government under 74th Constitution Amendment, the SPV model designed for smart cities was not aligned with the 74th Constitutional Amendment
• became exclusionary for the common people
• Focused only some selected areas around 1% of the total city. For example Chandigarh- Sector 43 and with few services like wifi zone, solid waste management, smart water meters etc.
• Urban India, according to the World Bank has more than 49% of the population living in slums. In the name of executing smart city projects, there was displacement of people living in poorer localities. Street vendors, for example, were displaced and urban commons were disrupted.
• It has led to urban flooding in various cites which never experienced the urban flood.

The legal position on live-in relationships

The background story
• The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim cannot claim rights in a live-in relationship if they have a living spouse. The court declared such relationships against Islamic tenets while hearing a writ petition by Sneha Devi and Mohammed Shadab Khan. This couple sought protection from police action after the woman’s parents filed a kidnapping case against Khan.
What Happened?
• The couple, both adults in a live-in relationship, sought protection under Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty). The judges stated that Islamic tenets do not permit live-in relationships during a subsisting marriage.
• Mr. Khan was married to Farida Khatoon since 2020. The court acknowledged constitutional morality might protect an unmarried couple in a live-in relationship but stated that Article 21 does not support a right to such a relationship when one partner is married.
Previous Orders
• Live-in relationships with varying marital statuses and faiths have been considered by the judiciary. In November last year, the Supreme Court stayed orders awarding maintenance to a woman from a man she lived with while both were married to others.
• The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a couple living together without divorcing their previous spouses could not be classified as in a “live-in relationship” and this could amount to bigamy under Sections 494/495 of the IPC.
What Have the Courts Said About Live-In Relationships?
• India has no laws directly addressing live-in partnerships.
• The Supreme Court has ruled that living together is part of ‘the right to life’ and is not an offence.
• In Payal Sharma versus Nari Niketan, the Allahabad High Court recognized that a man and a woman can live together without being married, considering it a legal right despite societal views on morality.

GANHRI Defers NHRC Accreditation

• Deferral of Accreditation: The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) deferred the accreditation of India’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) for the second consecutive year.
• Impact: This decision may affect India’s ability to vote at the Human Rights Council and some UN General Assembly bodies.
• Meeting Details: The decision was made during the Subcommittee on Accreditation (SCA) meeting on May 1, which included representatives from New Zealand, South Africa, Honduras, and Greece.
Reasons for Deferral
• Lack of Transparency: Previous reports cited the lack of transparency in appointing NHRC members.
• Appointment Issues: Concerns about appointing police officers to oversee human rights investigations.
• Representation Gaps: Lack of gender and minority representation on the NHRC member panel.
Official Response
• Election Constraints: Some demands for structural changes and suggestions from GANHRI were difficult to implement due to the ongoing general elections in India.
• Review Timeline: The deferral will likely be reviewed in meetings scheduled for September this year or May next year.
Historical Context
• Previous Deferral: NHRC’s ‘A-status’ was previously deferred in 2016 but restored in 2017.
• Current Suspension: This is the first time India’s status has been suspended for two consecutive years (2023 and 2024).
Background on NHRC
• Establishment: The NHRC was established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, passed by Parliament in 1993.
• Accreditation History: Accredited as ‘A’ Status NHRI since 1999, retained in 2006, 2011, and 2017 after previous deferment. This process was started in 1999.
Concerns Raised
• Civil Society Input: Deferral followed submissions from civil society organizations and human rights activists about India’s human rights record.
• SCA Report: The March 2023 six-point submission indicated NHRC’s failure to operate independently of government interference.

India, Iran sign Chabahar port operation pact

India-Iran Chabahar Port Agreement

• Agreement Signed: India and Iran signed a 10-year contract for the operation of the Chabahar port, eight years after initially concluding the framework for cooperation. The agreement was signed between Indian Ports Global Ltd. (IPGL) and Iran’s Port and Maritime Organisation (PMO).
Historical Background
• Initial MoU: A memorandum of understanding for the port’s development was signed in May 2015.
• Previous Execution: The contract was executed on May 23, 2016, during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Iran.
Significance and Impact
• Trade and Cooperation: The agreement aims to enhance trade, marine cooperation, and transshipment, boosting trilateral trade between India, Iran, and Afghanistan.
• Regional Development: India’s continued investment will enhance the port’s efficiency and capacity, supporting regional economic development and humanitarian aid shipments.
• Strategic Importance: Chabahar port serves as a crucial trade artery connecting India with Afghanistan and Central Asian countries.
Location
• Chabahar Port: Located in the Sistan-Baluchistan province of Iran, it is a deep-water port significant for regional trade.