What’s in today’s article?

• Introduction
• Origin of the Concept
• Epidemiological Patterns
• Challenges in Prediction
• Global Preparedness and WHO’s Priority List
• Need for Global Collaboration
• Lessons from Recent Outbreak
• Conclusion

Introduction

• Disease X represents a hypothetical, yet highly probable, global health threat.
• Coined by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2018, the term is a placeholder for any unknown pathogen capable of causing a devastating epidemic or pandemic.
• Recent outbreaks, such as the unclassified one in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) that claimed over 400 lives, highlight the urgent need for preparedness against such threats.

Origin of the Concept

• The term "Disease X" emerged after the West African Ebola epidemic (2014–2016), which exposed gaps in global epidemic readiness.
• It embodies "known unknowns" (threats we are aware of but lack specifics) and "unknown unknowns" (threats beyond our awareness).
• The concept underscores the inevitability of new pathogens and emphasizes proactive preparation.

Epidemiological Patterns

• Since 1940, over 300 emerging infectious diseases have been identified, with 70% having zoonotic origins (transmitted from animals to humans).
• Human activities such as deforestation, urbanization, and climate change exacerbate these risks, bringing wildlife and humans into closer contact.
• Regions with high biodiversity and limited healthcare infrastructure, such as the Congo Basin, are particularly vulnerable.

Challenges in Prediction

• Predicting Disease X is challenging due to:
  • The vast number of undiscovered pathogens.
  • Increasing zoonotic spillovers driven by human encroachment.
  • Climate change altering disease dynamics and expanding vectors like malaria and dengue.
  • Risks from antimicrobial resistance, bioterrorism, and accidental lab leaks.
• Advancements in genomic sequencing and artificial intelligence offer hope but remain limited in their ability to predict the exact origin, timing, or behaviour of unknown pathogens.

Global Preparedness and WHO’s Priority List

• The WHO's priority pathogen list includes diseases like Ebola, Marburg, Nipah, and Disease X.
• This list aims to direct global research, funding, and policy efforts toward combating high-risk diseases with limited medical countermeasures.
• Measures for Preparedness:
  • Strengthening Surveillance: Robust systems for early outbreak detection are critical. Technologies like genomic sequencing and real-time data sharing play pivotal roles.
  • Healthcare Infrastructure: Low- and middle-income countries require enhanced healthcare systems to mitigate the disproportionate impact of pandemics.
  • Rapid Response Platforms: Organizations like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) are developing "prototype pathogen" platforms to create vaccines within 100 days of identifying a new disease.
• CEPI is an innovative partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil organisations, launched at Davos in 2017, to develop vaccines against future epidemics.

Need for Global Collaboration

• Pandemics transcend borders, necessitating unified global efforts:
  • WHO Initiatives: Efforts like the Pandemic Treaty aim to standardize global responses.
  • Equitable Access: Frameworks like the Nagoya Protocol ensure fair distribution of resources and medical countermeasures.
  • International Cooperation: Governments must share data, pool resources, and collaborate on diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines.

Lessons from Recent Outbreak

• The outbreak in the DRC is a stark reminder of the ongoing threat posed by Disease X.
• Proactive investment in research, public health systems, and international solidarity can mitigate the devastating consequences of future pandemics.

Conclusion

• Disease X serves as a call to action for the global community.
• Preparedness is not an option but a necessity to safeguard future generations.
• By prioritizing collaboration, innovation, and robust health systems, humanity can confront and contain the unpredictable threats of emerging diseases.

Q1. What is the Universal Immunisation Programme?

Universal Immunisation Programme is a vaccination programme launched by the Government of India in 1985. It became a part of Child Survival and Safe Motherhood Programme in 1992 and is currently one of the key areas under the National Health Mission since 2005.

Q2. What do you mean by Epidemic, Endemic and Pandemic?

Endemic: A disease is endemic when it's consistently present in a specific region, making its spread and rates predictable. For example, malaria is endemic in some countries. 

Epidemic: An epidemic describes how far a disease outbreak has spread. 

Pandemic: A pandemic is declared when a disease's growth rate skyrockets, and each day's cases are more than the previous day's. Pandemics cross international boundaries and can lead to large-scale social disruption, economic loss, and hardship. A once-declared epidemic can progress into a pandemic.

News: What is Disease X and why the world should prepare for it

What’s in today’s article?

• Why in News?
• Places of Worship Act, 1991
• Background of the case
• Core question before the SC and the previous rulings on the issue
• December 2024 Ruling – key directions by the SC

Why in News?

The Supreme Court barred civil courts from registering fresh suits challenging the ownership or title of any place of worship and from ordering surveys of disputed religious sites until further orders.

Pending suits were also restricted from issuing "effective" interim or final orders, including surveys, until the next hearing on February 17, 2025.

Places of Worship Act, 1991

• Historical Context
  • Passed during the Ramjanmabhoomi movement in the late 1980s, which aimed to build a Ram temple at the Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya.
  • Concerned about potential similar movements and litigation, the PV Narasimha Rao-led government enacted the law to prevent future disputes.
• Objective of the Act
  • The Act was enacted to:
    • Prohibit conversion of any place of worship to maintain its religious character as it existed on August 15, 1947.
    • Prevent conversion both within a religion (e.g., from one denomination to another) and between religions.
• Structure:
  • The Act comprises seven sections:
    • Sections 1 & 2: Title and definitions.
    • Section 3: Bars conversion of places of worship.
    • Section 4: Declares the religious character of places of worship and bars court jurisdiction.
    • Section 5: Excludes Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid from its provisions.
• Legal Provisions
  • Sections 4(1)
    • Declares that the religious character of a place of worship as of August 15, 1947, must be maintained.
  • Section 4(2):
    • Existing suits: Legal proceedings related to the conversion of a place of worship’s religious character, pending before a court on August 15, 1947, shall abate.
    • Fresh suits: New legal proceedings on such matters cannot be instituted.
    • Exception: Suits or appeals regarding conversions occurring after the cut-off date (August 15, 1947) can continue.
    • Exceptions to Section 4: The following are exceptions where the provisions of Section 4 do not apply:
      • Protected Sites: Places classified as ancient monuments or archaeological sites under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act.
      • Resolved Legal Cases: Cases or appeals already decided, resolved, or settled before the Act came into effect.
      • Mutual Settlements: Disputes where parties settled the matter before the Act’s commencement.
      • Change by Acquiescence: Places of worship whose religious character was altered by mutual agreement.
      • Time-Barred Cases: Conversion cases that occurred before the Act and cannot be challenged due to the expiration of the time limit under existing laws.
  • Section 5:
    • Excludes the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case from the Act's provisions.

Background of the case

• Case before the court
  • The present case is related to the petitions challenging the Constitutional validity of Places of Worship Act, 1991.
  • The petitioners had challenged the Act on two grounds:
    • It bars judicial review, which is a basic feature of the Constitution, 
    • It imposes an arbitrary irrational retrospective cutoff date and abridges the right to religion of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs.
• Timeline

Core question before the SC and pervious ruling on the issue

• Core Question Before the Supreme Court
  • Can district courts hearing civil suits on title or ownership of places of worship effectively undermine the purpose of the 1991 Places of Worship Act, which aims to resolve such disputes?
• 2022 Supreme Court Observations
  • The Supreme Court previously ruled that surveying a place of worship does not inherently violate the 1991 Act.
  • A three-judge bench led by then CJI DY Chandrachud examined the interplay of religious identities in places of worship, highlighting "hybrid character" scenarios, such as the coexistence of Zoroastrian and Christian religious symbols in the same complex.
  • The bench clarified it would not opine on whether ascertaining the religious character of a place violates Sections 3 and 4 of the Act.
• Ayodhya Verdict and Its Relevance
  • In the November 2029 Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi judgment, the Supreme Court recognized the Places of Worship Act as part of the Constitution's basic structure.
  • The Act was viewed as crucial for preserving secularism and ensuring the protection of religious sites as they existed on August 15, 1947.
  • The verdict recognized that historical wrongs cannot justify actions that disturb the present and future, emphasizing the Act's role in healing past wounds and ensuring communal harmony.

December 2024 Ruling – key directions by the SC

• Key Directions from the Bench
  • The Supreme Court emphasized that while fresh suits may be filed, no action will be taken on them, nor will ongoing proceedings progress.
  • Directed the Union Government to clarify its position on the constitutional validity of the Act within four weeks.
• Key observations made
  • The Supreme Court noted that issues regarding the constitutional validity, scope, and ambit of the Act require detailed examination.
  • Highlighted that lower civil courts must defer to principles laid out in the Ayodhya judgment, stating, “Civil courts cannot race with the Supreme Court.”
• Larger constitutional questions
  • SC noted that even without the Act, constitutional principles might bar suits seeking to alter the religious character of places of worship.
  • It acknowledged petitions questioning whether the Act restricts judicial review powers, adding another layer of constitutional scrutiny.

Q.1. What is the core issue before the Supreme Court regarding the Places of Worship Act, 1991?

The core issue is whether civil courts can override the provisions of the Act, which aims to preserve the religious character of places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947, by allowing disputes over ownership and title to be challenged.

Q.2. What did the Supreme Court emphasize in its December 2024 ruling on the Places of Worship Act?

The Supreme Court emphasized that while new suits can be filed, no action will be taken on them. It also directed the Union Government to clarify its position on the constitutional validity of the Act, emphasizing the need for deference to the Ayodhya judgment.

News: Places of Worship Act: How SC undid what then CJI Chandrachud allowed two years ago | Indian Express | News Laundry

What’s in today’s article?

• Why in News?
• Why Beijing holds significance for Delhi in war against air pollution?
• Steps taken by Beijing to control its air pollution
• What can Delhi learn from the Beijing experience?

Why in News?

In 2015, Beijing's yearly average AQI was 144, comparable to Delhi's current average of 155 in 2024. Since then, Beijing has reduced its pollution levels by one-third, with the most significant improvements occurring between 2013 and 2017. 

This progress was built on the foundation of a pollution control programme initiated in 1998, culminating in an aggressive phase referred to as a "war against air pollution."

Why Beijing holds significance for Delhi in war against air pollution?

• Beijing's success in tackling air pollution serves as a model for Delhi, which faces similar challenges, particularly during winter. 
  • Beijing is the capital of an emerging economy, as is Delhi. So, if Beijing could manage what it did at its stage of development, Delhi could and needs to, as well.
• Like Beijing in 2013, Delhi's pollution is significantly influenced by regional contributions from neighboring states. 

• While controlling local emissions is essential, a coordinated effort across the entire NCR region is crucial to effectively combat air pollution.

Steps taken by Beijing to control its air pollution

• Beijing's Pollution Challenge: A Gradual Response
  • With rapid economic growth and urbanization by the late 1990s, Beijing faced escalating air pollution due to increased energy consumption, heavily coal-dependent heating, and industrial emissions.
• Three-Phase Anti-Pollution Programme (1998-2017)
  • Beijing implemented a phased, carefully planned anti-pollution strategy involving public participation and local government autonomy.
• Energy and Coal Combustion Control
  • Ultra-low emission renovation in power plants.
  • Replacement of coal-fired boilers with cleaner alternatives.
  • Elimination of residential coal use for heating.
• Transportation Infrastructure Overhaul
  • Retrofit of vehicles with diesel particulate filters (DPF).
  • Gradual scrapping of high-polluting vehicles with subsidies.
  • Expansion of subway and bus networks and urban layout optimization.
• Industrial and Construction Regulation
  • Stricter environmental requirements and end-of-pipe (EOP) treatment.
  • Elimination of outdated industrial capacities.
  • Green construction management, advanced washing facilities, and video monitoring with penalties for violations.
• Regional Cooperation for Success (2013-2017)
  • The final phase emphasized collaboration with five neighboring provinces, leading to a significant reduction in pollution levels through a collective regional effort.
• Achievements - Significant Reduction in Key Pollutants (2013-2017)
  • Beijing's targeted anti-pollution strategy led to substantial declines in major pollutants: sulphur dioxide (83%), nitrogen oxide (43%), volatile organic compounds (42%), and PM2.5 (59%). 
  • Tackling pollution at its sources reduced multiple pollutants simultaneously.
• Critical Role of Financial Investment
  • A pivotal factor in Beijing's success was the government's substantial financial commitment. 
  • Investments in pollution control surged six-fold within four years, funding the detailed and multi-faceted strategies essential for achieving the desired outcomes.

What can Delhi learn from the Beijing experience?

• Ideas related to transportation
  • Implementing an efficient bus-metro integrated transport system, upgrading the DTC bus fleet, and improving last-mile connectivity.
  • Scrapping old vehicles through a subsidy-for-scrap program and creating exclusive cycling and walking lanes.
  • Experimenting with congestion charges, high parking fees, and separate fuel costs to promote public transport and reduce private vehicle use.
  • Developing an urban layout that brings workplaces and residences closer to minimize long-distance travel.
• Energy Overhaul for Cleaner Air
  • Delhi’s electricity grid, still primarily coal-dependent, needs restructuring. 
  • Subsidies for solar rooftops and grid integration, along with electricity bill discounts, could promote cleaner energy alternatives.
• Regional Cooperation for Pollution Control
  • Coordination with neighboring regions is crucial, as pollution sources often originate beyond Delhi. 
  • A collective effort to reduce regional pollution could benefit all involved.
• Public Awareness and Accountability
  • Delhi’s residents must demand clean air and hold the government accountable, instead of tolerating poor air quality. 
  • Changing the attitude towards air pollution could pressure authorities to take action.
• Political Will and Government Accountability
  • The lack of political will is hindering progress in pollution control. Despite years of worsening air quality, the government continues to blame each other while providing insufficient solutions. 
  • The public, especially the disadvantaged, is left to cope with the problem. 
  • Delhi deserves a more serious and effective response from both the Centre and the State.

Q.1. What key lessons can Delhi learn from Beijing’s war on air pollution?

Delhi can adopt Beijing's comprehensive pollution control strategy, including improving public transport, upgrading the DTC bus fleet, increasing regional cooperation, promoting cleaner energy, and holding the government accountable for air quality improvement.

Q.2. What are the main strategies Beijing used to reduce air pollution?

Beijing focused on energy renovation, vehicle retrofitting, coal reduction, industrial regulations, and regional cooperation. Financial investment played a crucial role, with significant reductions in pollutants like PM2.5, nitrogen oxide, and sulfur dioxide through targeted actions from 2013 to 2017.

News: Beijing’s war against air pollution | Explained