{"id":133058,"date":"2026-11-14T10:42:57","date_gmt":"2026-11-14T05:12:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=133058"},"modified":"2026-11-14T11:35:38","modified_gmt":"2026-11-14T06:05:38","slug":"daily-editorial-analysis-14-november-2026","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/daily-editorial-analysis-14-november-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"Daily Editorial Analysis 14 November 2026"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><strong>To Strengthen the Supreme Court, Divide It <\/strong><\/h2>\n<h3><strong>Context<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial authority and guardian of the Constitution, fundamental rights, and democratic values.<\/li>\n<li>However, its <strong>expanding workload<\/strong> and mounting pendency have weakened its ability to perform its primary constitutional responsibilities.<\/li>\n<li>Increasingly occupied with ordinary appeals, the court has struggled to address important constitutional questions.<\/li>\n<li>In 2016, three <strong>Supreme Court judges raised 11 questions<\/strong> about the institution&#8217;s functioning and referred them to a larger Bench. A decade later, the reference remains unheard.<\/li>\n<li>This highlights <strong>the urgency of judicial reform<\/strong> and strengthens the case for dividing the Supreme Court into a Constitutional Court and regional Courts of Appeal.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>The Growing Crisis of Judicial Pendency<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>By the end of 2025, the Supreme Court had approximately <strong>92,318 pending cases<\/strong>, its highest recorded backlog.<\/li>\n<li>This represented an increase of nearly 10,000 cases over the previous year.<\/li>\n<li>The problem extends <strong>beyond insufficient judicial strength<\/strong> to the institutional structure itself.<\/li>\n<li>During the first half of the 1960s, Constitution Benches decided an average of 134 cases annually. Over the last decade, this declined to fewer than 10 cases annually.<\/li>\n<li>Meanwhile, <strong>Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) under Article 136<\/strong> have increasingly dominated the court&#8217;s workload, accounting for approximately 84.6% of its admission docket in 2011.<\/li>\n<li>Originally intended as an extraordinary remedy, Article 136 has contributed to transforming the Supreme Court into a general appellate court.<\/li>\n<li>In <strong>Bihar Legal Support Society (1986),<\/strong> a Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice P.N. Bhagwati clarified that the Supreme Court was never intended to function as an ordinary court of appeal.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Recommendations of the Law Commission and Parliament<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>The 229th Law Commission Report (2009) recommended a Constitution Bench in Delhi alongside four regional Cassation Benches.<\/li>\n<li>Similarly, a Parliamentary Standing Committee in 2023 recommended <strong>regional Benches<\/strong>, subsequently accepted by the Union Law Ministry.<\/li>\n<li>These recommendations demonstrate that <strong>judicial restructuring<\/strong> has considerable institutional support.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>International Experiences and Comparative Models<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Several democracies successfully separate constitutional adjudication from ordinary appellate functions.<\/li>\n<li><strong>United States:<\/strong> The Supreme Court operates above 13 federal Courts of Appeals and considers only a small proportion of cases.<\/li>\n<li><strong>South Africa:<\/strong> It has a separate Constitutional Court and Supreme Court of Appeal.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Germany:<\/strong> Its Federal Constitutional Court exclusively handles constitutional matters, while specialised federal courts address other disputes.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Brazil: <\/strong>Its 1988 Constitution established a separate Superior Tribunal of Justice to handle ordinary federal appeals, relieving the Supreme Federal Tribunal of its dual responsibilities.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Importance of Judicial Filtering<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Brazil&#8217;s experience demonstrates that <strong>structural separation<\/strong> alone cannot eliminate congestion.<\/li>\n<li>Effective case-selection mechanisms are equally necessary.<\/li>\n<li>The U.S. Supreme Court accepts roughly 1% of the 7,000 petitions it receives annually through its <strong>discretionary review system.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li>Similarly, Brazil introduced the general repercussion requirement in 2004, allowing constitutional appeals only when questions have significance beyond the immediate parties.<\/li>\n<li><strong>India could adopt comparable mechanisms<\/strong> to prevent the proposed Constitutional Court from becoming another overburdened institution.<\/li>\n<li>The 229th Law Commission Report also suggested that <strong>Article 130 could permit regional Benches<\/strong> without necessarily requiring a constitutional amendment.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Concerns Regarding the Division of the Supreme Court<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Successive Chief Justices have opposed the proposal on grounds of <strong>institutional unity. <\/strong><\/li>\n<li>They argue that regional Courts of Appeal might be perceived as inferior institutions, encouraging litigants to approach the Constitutional Court in Delhi.<\/li>\n<li>Such a development could create <strong>another appellate hierarchy<\/strong> and weaken the authority of a single final court.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Institutional coherence, judicial independence<\/strong>, and consistency of judgments must therefore remain central considerations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>The Way Forward: Restoring the Court<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Addressing the Illusion of Institutional Unity<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>The existing Supreme Court already functions through numerous small Benches, sometimes delivering contradictory judgments.<\/li>\n<li>Its constitutional responsibilities receive inadequate attention because of excessive appellate litigation.<\/li>\n<li>Thus, institutional unity is increasingly theoretical. A separate Constitutional Court could restore coherence by concentrating on questions affecting the entire Republic.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Steps Beyond Increasing Judicial Strength <\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>Expanding judicial strength has not resolved the problem. When the sanctioned strength increased to 34 judges in 2019, pendency stood at approximately 60,000 cases.<\/li>\n<li>By the end of 2025, it had reached nearly 93,000.<\/li>\n<li>During 2025, the court disposed of 65,615 cases, while 75,410 fresh matters arrived. In 2026, Parliament increased its sanctioned strength to 38 judges.<\/li>\n<li>These figures demonstrate that appointing additional judges without restructuring judicial responsibilities cannot provide a lasting solution.<\/li>\n<li>The priority must be rationalising the distribution of judicial work.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>The <strong>Supreme Court&#8217;s mounting pendency<\/strong> reflects a deeper institutional crisis affecting constitutional adjudication and access to justice.<\/li>\n<li>Establishing a dedicated Constitutional Court and regional Courts of Appeal, supported by effective case-filtering mechanisms, offers a practical solution.<\/li>\n<li>Although concerns about institutional unity require safeguards, <strong>preserving the existing structure is unlikely to resolve the crisis. <\/strong><\/li>\n<li>Judicial specialisation, constitutional accountability, institutional efficiency, and speedy justice must guide reform.<\/li>\n<li>Restructuring would not diminish the Supreme Court&#8217;s authority but restore its constitutional purpose while ensuring accessible and timely justice for ordinary citizens.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>To Strengthen the Supreme Court, Divide It FAQs<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>Q1. <\/strong>Why is restructuring the Supreme Court necessary?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans. <\/strong>The restructuring is necessary to reduce judicial pendency and restore the court&#8217;s constitutional responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q2.<\/strong> What is the proposed two-tier judicial structure?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans. <\/strong>It proposes a Constitutional Court in Delhi and four or five regional Courts of Appeal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q3.<\/strong> What is the significance of Article 136?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans. <\/strong>Article 136 empowers the Supreme Court to entertain Special Leave Petitions as an extraordinary appellate remedy.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q4.<\/strong> What is the main concern regarding the division of the Supreme Court?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans. <\/strong>The main concern is that division could weaken institutional unity and create conflicting judicial interpretations.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q5.<\/strong> Why is increasing the number of judges insufficient?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans. <\/strong>Increasing judicial strength alone cannot resolve congestion without restructuring the distribution of judicial responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Source: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/opinion\/lead\/to-strengthen-the-supreme-court-divide-it\/article71698099.ece\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">The Hindu<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h2><strong>The Challenge of Holding the Quad Together<\/strong><\/h2>\n<h3><strong>Context<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>The US Secretary of State announced that leaders of the four <a href=\"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/upsc-exam\/quad\/\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>Quad countries<\/strong><\/a> \u2014 India, Australia, Japan, and the US \u2014 are expected to meet in Manila in November 2026, on the sidelines of the ASEAN Summit.<\/li>\n<li>This marks the <strong>first Quad Leaders\u2019 Summit<\/strong> since Donald Trump\u2019s <strong>second term<\/strong> began, and the first attended by Japanese PM Sanae Takaichi.\n<ul>\n<li>The last such summit was held in Wilmington (2024), under Biden and Kishida.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>This announcement comes after a turbulent 2025 for the grouping, raising key questions about the Quad\u2019s future cohesion and Trump\u2019s Indo-Pacific vision.<\/li>\n<li>This article highlights the challenges facing the Quad grouping amid shifting US geopolitical priorities and growing uncertainty over Washington\u2019s Indo-Pacific engagement.<\/li>\n<li>It examines the grouping\u2019s efforts to sustain cooperation despite strategic turbulence, the significance of the proposed Manila summit, and how India, Japan and Australia are diversifying their security partnerships.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>A Period of Strategic Turbulence<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Though India was expected to host the next summit, 2025 saw the Quad undergo intense strategic turbulence due to shifting US geopolitical priorities and changing bilateral dynamics, especially with India.<\/li>\n<li>Despite this, the grouping did not collapse \u2014 operational cooperation continued.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Key Achievement<\/strong>: The Quad\u2019s Indo-Pacific Maritime Domain Awareness initiative was elevated to the Indo-Pacific Maritime Surveillance Collaboration framework, launched in New Delhi (May 2026) following a Quad Foreign Ministers\u2019 Meeting.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Keeping the Quad Afloat: Ministerial Engagement<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Foreign Ministers met multiple times despite the political low point:\n<ul>\n<li><strong>2025<\/strong>: Twice in <strong>Washington<\/strong> (first meeting marked Marco Rubio\u2019s debut as Secretary of State).<\/li>\n<li><strong>2026<\/strong>: Three times \u2014 in <strong>New Delhi, Manila, and Atlanta<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>Since the Quad lacks a permanent bureaucracy or institutional framework, leader-level summits serve as vital platforms to reaffirm shared purpose and set the agenda.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>The Core Question: Trump\u2019s Indo-Pacific Engagement<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>This summit will be the first real indication of Trump\u2019s Indo-Pacific vision for his second term.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Historical Context:<\/strong> The Quad was revived during Trump\u2019s first term (2017), which also saw the US Pacific Command renamed US Indo-Pacific Command.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Current Concerns:<\/strong> Trump\u2019s priorities have been dominated by the Russia-Ukraine war, transatlantic\/NATO relations, and the West Asia conflict \u2014 causing regional partners to worry about a potential shift away from the Indo-Pacific.<\/li>\n<li>Trump\u2019s push for greater burden-sharing among partners, and the White House\u2019s review of AUKUS, have heightened uncertainty among Indo-Pacific players.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Regional Responses: Diversification Strategies<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Facing this uncertainty, Quad partners have pursued diversification of their security approaches:\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Japan:<\/strong> Launched the <strong>OCEAN <\/strong>(One Cooperative Effort Among Nations) framework, reshaping its post-war security posture through deeper strategic alignment with partners.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Australia:<\/strong> Strengthened defence partnerships with India, Japan, Southeast Asian nations, and Pacific Island countries to counter China\u2019s expanding footprint.<\/li>\n<li><strong>India:<\/strong> Continues its policy of multi-alignment, diversifying defence and strategic ties across the Indian Ocean and wider Indo-Pacific.<\/li>\n<li><strong>JAI grouping<\/strong> (Japan-Australia-India): Defence Ministers met recently in Cebu, signalling deeper trilateral cooperation independent of Washington\u2019s role.<\/li>\n<li><strong>France:<\/strong> Emerging as a new Indo-Pacific player, strengthening ties with regional countries for a balanced security environment.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>Despite this diversification, <strong>Washington\u2019s role remains critical<\/strong> \u2014 particularly in safeguarding the Taiwan Strait, a key flashpoint amid China\u2019s growing maritime assertiveness.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Why Manila Matters: A Strategic Message<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Though India was expected to host the summit, the Philippines hosting it reinforces a foundational Quad pillar: <strong>ASEAN centrality.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li>The Philippines is at the frontline of Chinese assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific, with ongoing South China Sea sovereignty disputes with Beijing.<\/li>\n<li>Following precedent, Quad leaders are expected to reiterate the importance of respecting sovereignty in the South and East China Seas and condemn violations of international law.<\/li>\n<li>For Trump, this visit carries two key priorities: resetting American posture in the region and reaffirming the Quad\u2019s commitment against Chinese belligerence \u2014 delivered symbolically from Manila itself.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>The Manila summit represents a crucial test of the Quad\u2019s resilience amid Trump-era uncertainty. While regional partners diversify their strategic options, sustained American engagement remains indispensable for countering China\u2019s assertiveness and preserving a stable, rules-based Indo-Pacific order.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>The Challenge of Holding the Quad Together FAQs<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>Q1<\/strong>. What makes the proposed Manila summit significant for the Quad?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans.<\/strong> The Manila summit will be the first Quad Leaders\u2019 Summit since Trump\u2019s second term began and Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi took office.<\/p>\n<p>Q2. How did the Quad sustain cooperation during the strategic turbulence of 2025?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans.<\/strong> Despite political differences, ministerial meetings continued, while maritime cooperation advanced through the Indo-Pacific Maritime Surveillance Collaboration framework launched in New Delhi in May 2026.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q3.<\/strong> Why is Trump\u2019s Indo-Pacific engagement a major concern for Quad partners?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans.<\/strong> Trump\u2019s focus on other geopolitical priorities, demands for greater burden-sharing and review of AUKUS have created uncertainty about sustained American regional engagement.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q4.<\/strong> How are Quad partners diversifying their regional security strategies?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans.<\/strong> Japan launched OCEAN, Australia strengthened regional defence partnerships, India pursued multi-alignment, while the Japan-Australia-India grouping deepened trilateral defence cooperation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q5.<\/strong> Why does hosting the Quad summit in Manila carry strategic significance?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans.<\/strong> Manila reinforces ASEAN centrality and highlights South China Sea tensions, offering an opportunity to reaffirm sovereignty, international law and opposition to Chinese assertiveness.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Source: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/opinion\/op-ed\/the-challenge-of-holding-the-quad-together\/article71698092.ece\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">TH<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h2><strong>Egg Donation Trafficking in India &#8211; Regulatory Gaps and the Need for Stronger Enforcement<\/strong><\/h2>\n<h3><strong>Context<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>The alleged <strong>rescue of 43 women<\/strong> from an egg-donation trafficking network in Hyderabad has exposed serious gaps in the regulation of Assisted Reproductive Technology (<strong>ART<\/strong>) in India.<\/li>\n<li>The women, recruited from different States, were reportedly promised \u20b920,000\u201330,000 per donation cycle. The accused were allegedly linked to 23 IVF centres.<\/li>\n<li>Similar incidents in <strong>Erode <\/strong>(2022) and <strong>Varanasi <\/strong>(2023), involving the alleged forced donation of eggs by minors, highlight the exploitation of economically vulnerable women, the role of brokers, document falsification and <strong>inadequate oversight<\/strong> of fertility clinics.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Legal Framework Governing Egg Donation in India<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/assisted-reproductive-technology-regulation-act-2021\/\" target=\"_blank\">The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021<\/a><\/strong> provides safeguards to prevent exploitation and regulate egg donation.<\/li>\n<li>Key provisions &#8211;\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Section 27<\/strong>: Only registered ART banks are authorised to screen and register donors and supply gametes to ART clinics.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Section 21(b)<\/strong>: ART clinics must obtain gametes exclusively from registered ART banks.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Eligibility criteria<\/strong>: A woman can donate eggs only once in her lifetime, between the ages of 23 and 35 years.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Limit on retrieval<\/strong>: A maximum of seven oocytes (eggs) can be retrieved from a donor in one cycle.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Section 33<\/strong>: Prohibits medical practitioners from using intermediaries to procure donors.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Penal provisions<\/strong>: The first offence attracts a fine of \u20b95\u201310 lakh, while subsequent offences can result in imprisonment of 3\u20138 years and a fine of \u20b910\u201320 lakh.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>These provisions aim to prevent commercial exploitation, repeated egg retrieval and the involvement of unauthorised agents.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Structural Weaknesses due to which Egg Donation Trafficking Persist<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Demand-supply imbalance:<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>Rising demand for donor eggs in fertility treatment, coupled with a limited pool of legally eligible donors, may encourage illegal recruitment.<\/li>\n<li>Brokers exploit economically vulnerable women by offering financial incentives and concealing the medical risks involved.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Role of brokers and document fraud:<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>Intermediaries recruit women across State boundaries, often through coercion, deception or financial inducements.<\/li>\n<li>Falsification of identity and age-related documents enables minors and otherwise ineligible women to enter the ART system.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Inadequate institutional oversight:<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>The National ART and Surrogacy Registry listed 4,726 registered clinics and 940 ART banks (as of October 31), significantly below the academic estimate of approximately 40,000 clinics.<\/li>\n<li>The discrepancy raises concerns about unregistered facilities, regulatory coverage and the actual scale of the ART sector.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Weak Enforcement and Lack of Transparency<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Inadequate regulatory data:<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>The Department of Health Research&#8217;s (DHR) Annual Report 2025\u201326 provides information on forms downloaded from the National Registry portal and permissions granted.<\/li>\n<li>However, it does not adequately disclose the number of regulatory inspections conducted, violations detected and penalties imposed, etc.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Non-functional or underdeveloped registry mechanism:<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>ART banks are required to maintain donor records and update the National Registry.<\/li>\n<li>An effective registry should identify previous donors and prevent repeat egg retrieval.<\/li>\n<li>However, the system for collecting donor information from clinics and banks has only been piloted.<\/li>\n<li>Lack of transparency regarding data verification and regular updates weakens safeguards against repeat donations, as illustrated by the Erode case.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h4><strong>Weak accountability of regulatory boards:<\/strong><\/h4>\n<ul>\n<li>Under Section 35,<strong> courts can take cognisance<\/strong> of offences under the Act only on complaints filed by the National or State Boards or their authorised officers.<\/li>\n<li>Rule 5 of the ART Rules, 2022, requires these Boards to submit annual reports to the government.<\/li>\n<li>The absence of the National Board&#8217;s report in the DHR annual report raises concerns about institutional accountability and transparency.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Protecting Victims and Ensuring Medical Accountability<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Women recruited through illegal networks should primarily be treated as victims and witnesses rather than accused persons.<\/li>\n<li>Essential safeguards include:\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Independent medical care<\/strong>: Comprehensive health assessments and monitoring for complications arising from hormonal stimulation and egg retrieval.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Health insurance<\/strong>: Section 22(1)(b) mandates 12 months of health insurance coverage for egg donors.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Legal protection<\/strong>: Victims must be protected from intimidation, coercion and further exploitation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Informed consent<\/strong>: Donors must be adequately informed about medical risks and procedures.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Way Forward<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Strengthen inspections:<\/strong> Conduct regular and surprise inspections of ART clinics and banks, including verification of donor registers and consent documents.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Operationalise the National Registry<\/strong>: Establish real-time donor-record updating, identity verification and safeguards against repeat donations.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Improve transparency<\/strong>: The Union Health Ministry should publish annual reports of the National and State Boards, while States should disclose inspections, violations, suspensions and prosecutions.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Fix institutional accountability<\/strong>: Take strict action against clinics and medical practitioners facilitating illegal recruitment, rather than targeting only intermediaries.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Inter-State coordination<\/strong>: Strengthen information-sharing between police forces, health regulators and ART authorities to dismantle trafficking networks.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>India&#8217;s challenge is not the absence of legislation but the gap between legal safeguards and their implementation.<\/li>\n<li>Egg donation must remain a regulated medical procedure based on informed consent, donor safety and ethical medical practices.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><strong>Egg Donation Trafficking in India FAQs<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p><strong>Q1<\/strong>. What are the key provisions of the ART (Regulation) Act, 2021, governing egg donation?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans<\/strong>. It permits egg donation only through registered ART banks, restricts donors to women aged 23\u201335 years, etc.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q2<\/strong>. Why does egg donation trafficking persist despite the ART Act, 2021?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans<\/strong>. Due to demand-supply gaps, economic vulnerability, illegal brokers, document falsification, etc.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q3<\/strong>. What are the major institutional weaknesses in regulating India&#8217;s ART sector?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans<\/strong>. Poor inspection mechanisms, an underdeveloped National Registry, inadequate disclosure of violations, etc.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q4<\/strong>. What safeguards does the ART Act, 2021 provide for egg donors?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans<\/strong>. Section 22(1)(b) mandates 12-month health insurance coverage, with informed consent and medical safeguards.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Q5<\/strong>. What measures are needed to prevent egg donation trafficking in India?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Ans<\/strong>. Operationalising the National Registry, conducting regular inspections, strengthening inter-State coordination, etc.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Source: <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/opinion\/columns\/hyderabad-varanasi-erode-brokers-women-for-eggs-10960495\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\"><strong>IE<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Daily Editorial Analysis 14 November by Vajiram &#038; Ravi covers key editorials from The Hindu &#038; Indian Express with UPSC-focused insights and relevance.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":34,"featured_media":86373,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[138],"tags":[141,882,909],"class_list":["post-133058","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-daily-editorial-analysis","tag-daily-editorial-analysis","tag-the-hindu-editorial-analysis","tag-the-indian-express-analysis","no-featured-image-padding"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133058","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/34"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=133058"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133058\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":133078,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133058\/revisions\/133078"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/86373"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=133058"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=133058"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=133058"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}