What’s in today’s article?

• Why in News?
• Naga Insurgency
• Naga Peace Accord

Why in News?

The Isak-Muivah faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN I-M) has requested third-party intervention to resolve the longstanding Naga political issue with the Indian government.

Accusing the Centre of betraying the 2015 Framework Agreement, NSCN (I-M) warns it may resume armed resistance if this proposal is denied.

The group asserts that the Centre reneged on commitments to recognize a separate Naga flag and constitution, essential for honoring the Naga people’s unique history and "shared sovereignty."

Naga Insurgency

• Background:
  • The British annexed Assam in 1826, and in 1881, the Naga Hills too became part of British India.
  • The Naga National Council (NNC) was formed in April 1946 to carry out social and political upliftment of the Nagas.
  • After the return of the radical leader of Naga cause, Angami Zapu Phizo, from Burma in 1947, the faction of NNC demanding full impendence grew strong.
• Shillong Accord and the split of NNC
  • The Shillong Accord was signed in 1975 by Government of India with a section of the NNC leaders.
  • As part of the accord, the leaders agreed to abjure violence and work towards the solution of the Naga problem within the framework of the Indian Constitution.
  • It was opposed by Phizo, Isak Swu and Muivah. Later, Isak Swu and Muivah formed the "National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN)" in January 1980.
  • Later, NSCN split into two factions, namely NCSN (I-M) led by Isak & Muivah and NCSN (K) led by Khaplang.
• Demand for Greater Nagaland
  • The Nagas under NSCN (I-M) had various views for a new Nagaland.
  • One was an independent nation of Nagaland comprising the present Nagaland, the Naga inhabited areas of Manipur and Myanmar.
  • Another one was to integrate the Naga inhabited districts of Manipur with the state of Nagaland under the Indian Constitution.

Naga Peace Accord

• Background
  • Since 1997, NSCN (I-M) has been involved in negotiations with the Government of India and signed many ceasefire agreements.
• 2015 Framework Agreement (FA)
  • On August 3, 2015, the Centre signed a framework agreement with the NSCN (I-M) to resolve the Naga issue.
  • Both sides-maintained secrecy about its contents. Hence, the details of the agreements are not entirely clear. However, broad points included:
  • The government could go for devolution of more powers to Nagaland under provisions of Article 371 (A) of the Constitution of India.
  • The army of NSCN-IM will be absorbed in a new force to be raised on the lines of Home Guards.
  • It would involve more autonomy to Naga tribes living in Manipur.
  • The agreement, however, does not include physical integration of all Naga areas in terms of a boundary.
  • The agreement was only a framework, with many details still to be hammered out.
• Issues with Framework agreement
  • The issue of sovereignty
    • The Framework agreement contains some clauses on ‘sharing sovereign power’ which is being interpreted differently by both sides.
    • The NSCN now argues that according to the agreement, its sovereignty has to be retained.
    • Any final agreement should be for peaceful coexistence of the two sovereign powers. This is not accepted by the Government.
  • Poor draft of the framework agreement
    • The wordings of the FA are vague, leaving for both sides to interpret the deal according to their own convenience.
    • E.g., FA at one point says, “Inclusive peaceful co-existence of the two entities sharing sovereign power”.
  • Issue of separate flag and constitution
    • NSCN(IM) contends that the idea of “sharing sovereign power” and “co-existence of the two entities” means:
    • Naga people will be entitled to their own national flag and constitution.
    • The FA was signed in 2015, when special status of Jammu and Kashmir existed.
    • However, the situation changed after scrapping of Article 370 and hence Centre cannot agree to such a demand.
  • Smaller groups such as Naga National Political Group (NNPGs) got strengthened
    • Another obstacle in the talks was that smaller groups such as NNPGs got strengthened during the tenure of previous interlocutor N Ravi.
    • He used the strategy of dividing the groups by giving more prominence to the smaller groups.
    • This annoyed the larger groups such as NSCN(IM) and they stayed away from the talks.
  • Release of the copy of the sensitive Framework Agreement
    • In August 2020, NSCN-IM released a copy of the sensitive Framework Agreement. This reduced the trust between the negotiating parties.
  • Trust deficit between the then Governor of Nagaland and NSCN
• The group accused the then Nagaland Governor N Ravi, an interlocutor, of deleting a keyword.
  • In November 2017, Ravi signed an agreement with seven groups who had come together under the banner of the NNPGs.
  • This did not include the NSCN (IM), which considers itself the principal representative of Naga aspirations.
  • As a result, NSCN (IM) accused Ravi of attempting to “segregate the Naga civil society”.
  • Later, R N Ravi resigned as interlocutor for the Naga peace talks.

Q.1. What is the NSCN (I-M)’s primary demand from the Indian government?

The NSCN (I-M) seeks recognition of a separate Naga flag and constitution as part of the 2015 Framework Agreement. They argue this is essential to honor Naga sovereignty and avoid further armed conflict.

Q.2. Why does NSCN (I-M) propose third-party mediation?

NSCN (I-M) proposes foreign mediation to resolve the deadlock, believing it can ensure the Framework Agreement is honored. Without this, they warn of resuming armed resistance against India.

News: NSCN (I-M) seeks third-party intervention to break talks deadlock | Indian Express | Indian Express

What’s in today’s article?

• Why in News?
• International Solar Alliance (ISA)
• ISA's Efforts to Overcome Barriers to Solar Deployment in Developing Countries
• India’s leadership role

Why in News?

India, alongside France, established the International Solar Alliance (ISA) at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference to promote solar energy deployment, particularly in developing nations. This marked a pioneering effort by India in global leadership for clean energy.

Since then, the ISA has grown into an intergovernmental organization with over 110 member countries. Despite its ambitious goals, the ISA's progress in accelerating solar energy adoption in the developing world has been limited.

International Solar Alliance (ISA)

• Background - Global Solar Energy Imbalance and the Role of the ISA
  • Solar energy is central to the global energy transition needed to combat climate change, being both the fastest-growing renewable source and the cheapest in sunny regions.
  • Projections show that solar capacity could increase significantly to achieve net zero by 2050.
  • However, deployment remains uneven: China alone accounts for 43% of global solar capacity, and the top 10 countries hold over 95% of installations.
  • Africa, home to most of the world's 745 million people without electricity, sees less than 2% of new solar additions.
  • Additionally, over 80% of solar manufacturing is concentrated in China, limiting rapid solar expansion in smaller markets. The ISA was founded to address and balance this disparity.
• About
  • ISA is a treaty based inter-governmental organization.
  • ISA was conceived as a coalition of solar-resource-rich countries (which lie either completely or partly between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn) to address their special energy needs.
  • It was launched jointly by India and France at the side-lines of COP 21 (held in Paris) in 2015. The Paris Declaration had established the ISA.
  • It is working to create a global market system to tap the benefits of solar power and promote clean energy applications.
  • HQ - Gurugram
• Objective
  • The objective of ISA is to collectively address key common challenges to the scaling up of solar energy in line with their needs.
  • To meet this objective, it aims to pave the way for future solar generation, storage and technologies for Member countries’ needs by mobilising over USD 1000 billion by 2030.
• Performance of ISA
  • ISA was designed to be a facilitator rather than a direct developer of solar projects.
  • It aimed to help countries address financial, technological, and regulatory barriers to boost solar energy deployment, especially in regions with low energy access.
  • However, nearly nine years after its inception, the ISA has seen limited impact, with no operational projects yet.
  • The first ISA-supported project, a 60 MW plant in Cuba, is still in development stages, with other countries in Africa and Latin America preparing for similar projects.
• ISA's Limited Impact Amid Global Solar Growth Concentration
  • Despite rapid global growth in solar energy, with an average 20% annual increase in capacity over the past five years and a 30% rise in 2023 alone, the ISA has struggled to facilitate broad deployment.
  • According to the ISA's World Solar Market Report 2024, China accounted for 62% (216 GW) of the 345 GW of new solar capacity added in 2023.
  • Over 80% of solar investments are concentrated in developed nations, China, and large developing countries like India, limiting ISA’s intended impact on smaller or less-developed markets.

ISA's Efforts to Overcome Barriers to Solar Deployment in Developing Countries

• ISA has focused on addressing significant entry barriers in smaller developing nations, especially in Africa, where large-scale solar project experience and local developers are lacking.
• Foreign investments require stable policies and regulatory frameworks, which ISA is helping to establish by working with governments and local institutions.
• Key initiatives include creating regulatory structures, drafting power purchase agreements, and establishing STAR (Solar Technology and Applications Resource) centers to build local expertise.
• ISA aims to deploy 1,000 GW of solar power and attract $1 trillion in investment by 2030.

India’s leadership role

• ISA was established not just to promote solar energy but as a strategic initiative for India’s outreach to the Global South, with a particular focus on Africa.
• Though an intergovernmental organization, ISA is widely seen as an Indian initiative due to its New Delhi headquarters, Indian funding, and Indian leadership of its general assembly, which will continue until at least 2026.
• PM Modi has highlighted ISA’s role as a symbol of India’s leadership for the Global South.
• However, ISA’s impact has been limited by underfunding, staffing shortages, and challenges in generating interest in solar energy among energy-deprived nations.
• Its underutilization affects India’s ambitions to lead and advocate for these countries on the global stage.

Q.1. What is the main objective of the International Solar Alliance?

ISA aims to promote solar energy, especially in developing countries, by addressing financial, technological, and regulatory barriers, with a target of deploying 1,000 GW of solar power by 2030.

Q.2. Why has ISA faced challenges in achieving its goals?

ISA's impact has been limited due to concentrated solar investment in a few countries, underfunding, and limited local expertise in developing nations. ISA is working on regulatory frameworks and training to overcome these barriers.

News: Explained: Taking stock of the International Solar Alliance | MNRE |International Solar Alliance

What’s in today’s article?

• Why in News?
• Background of the AMU Minority Status Case
• Constitutional Protections and Benefits of MEIs
• SC’s Criteria for Determining MEI Status
• Two-Fold Test to Establish Minority Status
• Implications of SC Determining MEI Status Test
• Conclusion

Why in News?

• Without determining whether Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) is a minority institution or not, a 7-judge bench of the Supreme Court overruled by a 4:3 majority a 1967 judgment by a 5-judge bench in Azeez Basha case.
• The majority opinion laid down elaborate parameters for testing the minority character of an institution and tasked a regular bench to adjudicate the 57-year-old controversy based on the parameters.

Background of the AMU Minority Status Case:

• AMU’s transformation from MAO college (1920)
  • The Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) college, established in 1877, was converted to AMU in 1920 by a central legislature Act.
  • The government argued this conversion changed its minority status, which became a pivotal issue in later legal debates.
• Azeez Basha case (1967): The SC held that AMU was not established by the Muslim community but by a central legislature Act in 1920, disqualifying it as a minority institution under Article 30 of the Constitution.
• Government amendments and legal developments (1981-2006):
  • 1981: An amendment to the AMU Act declared AMU was created by the Muslim community for their educational advancement.
  • 2005: AMU introduced 50% reservation for Muslims in postgraduate medical courses.
  • 2006: The Allahabad HC ruled against AMU’s minority status, annulling the 1981 amendment and the 50% reservation policy.
• SC referral (2019): The issue was brought before the Supreme Court, and in 2019, it was referred to a seven-judge Bench.

Constitutional Protections and Benefits of MEIs:

• Article 30: Under Article 30(1), minorities have the right to establish and administer educational institutions.
• Article 15(5): MEIs are granted special privileges, such as control over admissions and staff hiring, and exemption from reservations for SCs and STs under this provision.
• Benefits of minority status: Minority institutions can reserve up to 50% seats for minority students and enjoy autonomy in administration, fostering cultural and linguistic diversity.

SC’s Criteria for Determining MEI Status:

• The SC identified the following:
  • The institution’s purpose should primarily aim to conserve minority language and culture.
  • Minority institutions may admit non-minority students without losing their minority status.
  • Secular education does not undermine minority character.
  • Government-aided institutions cannot compel religious instruction; those fully state-funded cannot offer it.
• Test for determining minority character: The SC devised a two-step test to identify whether an institution holds a minority character.

Two-Fold Test to Establish Minority Status:

• Establishment:
  • Courts must investigate the origin and purpose of an institution's establishment, identifying community involvement in its formation.
  • Proof of establishment includes letters, funding records, and communications affirming that the institution’s aim was predominantly for the minority community’s benefit.
• Administration:
  • MEIs are not obligated to appoint only minority members to administrative roles. However, administrative setup should reflect minority interests.
  • For pre-1950 institutions, courts must review whether the administration affirmed the minority’s interest on the Constitution’s commencement date.

Implications of SC Determining MEI Status Test:

• Administrative autonomy affirmed: This is seen as a significant development for institutions like St Stephen’s College, which is currently in a dispute with Delhi University (DU) over its principal’s reappointment process.
• Reignites minority status debate:
  • The ongoing legal questions surrounding Jamia Millia Islamia's (JMI) minority status are closely connected to the AMU case.
  • According to JMI’s standing counsel, the SC’s decision on AMU’s minority status will likely affect JMI’s case as both involve similar legal principles about institutions created by legislative acts.

Conclusion:

• The SC’s verdict brings AMU closer to securing its minority status by clarifying criteria for minority character under Article 30. However, the final determination of AMU’s status awaits further review.
• This landmark judgment sets a precedent for MEIs, preserving minority rights in India’s educational framework while ensuring alignment with constitutional provisions.

Q.1. Who established the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental college?

Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental college was founded in 1875 by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, initially as a primary school, with the intention of turning it to a college level institution.

Q.2. What is Article 15(5) of the Constitution of India?

Article 15(5) of the Constitution gives the state the power to make special provisions for the following groups: socially and educationally backward classes of citizens, scheduled castes, and scheduled tribes.

News: SC overturns 1967 verdict that nixed AMU’s minority status | IE | IE

What’s in today’s article?

• Introduction
• Key Recommendations of the Bibek Debroy Committee
• Implementation Status
• Conclusion

Introduction

• The Bibek Debroy Committee, formed in 2014, aimed at suggesting comprehensive reforms for the Indian Railways to improve operational efficiency, financial viability, and competitiveness.
• Chaired by renowned economist Bibek Debroy, the committee published its landmark report in 2015, proposing extensive changes to transform Indian Railways.
• The report highlighted issues across decision-making structures, financial management, human resources, and the need for liberalization within Indian Railways.

Key Recommendations of the Bibek Debroy Committee

• Empowerment of Railway Officers:
  • The committee emphasized empowering field officers, including General Managers (GMs) and Divisional Railway Managers (DRMs), by granting them greater decision-making authority.
  • The government has partially implemented this by empowering GMs and DRMs to make independent decisions, handle various tenders, and manage divisions as business units.
• Establishment of an Independent Regulator:
  • A major recommendation was to set up an independent regulatory body to ensure fair competition and regulate pricing.
  • The Rail Development Authority (RDA) was approved in 2017, intended to provide expert advice on service pricing, enhance non-fare revenue, and foster competition.
• Liberalization of Indian Railways:
  • The committee recommended "liberalization," allowing private operators to participate in rail services to increase competitiveness and improve services.
  • It clarified that liberalization does not imply "privatization" but aims at creating a competitive environment.
  • However, due to opposition from railway unions and political parties, the government has not fully implemented this recommendation.
  • Private participation is limited to select Public-Private Partnership (PPP) projects, primarily in freight services.
• Redesignation of Railway Board Chairman as CEO:
  • To expedite decision-making, the committee recommended designating the Chairman of the Railway Board as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) with final decision-making authority.
  • This was implemented in 2020, with the first Chairman and CEO of the Railway Board appointed, making the Board function more like a corporate entity.
• Offloading Non-Core Services:
  • The committee suggested that Indian Railways focus on its core function of running trains, while outsourcing non-core services such as security (Railway Protection Force), medical, and educational facilities for employees.
  • The government is considering this recommendation to reduce operational burdens and improve focus on core railway services.
• Reforms in Accounting System:
  • A major overhaul of the accounting system was recommended to shift from cash-based accounting to accrual-based accounting, enhancing financial transparency.
  • This recommendation was implemented through an Accounting Reforms project, with Indian Railways now preparing financial statements on both accrual and cash bases.
• Safety Measures and Rashtriya Rail Sanraksha Kosh (RRSK):
  • In response to the committee's recommendations on safety, the Ministry of Railways created the Rashtriya Rail Sanraksha Kosh (RRSK) in 2017 with a fund of ₹1 lakh crore for replacing, renewing, and upgrading critical safety assets.
  • In 2022-23, the government extended RRSK with an additional ₹45,000 crore in budgetary support.
• Integration of Advanced Technology:
  • The committee recommended integrating advanced technology to modernize railway operations, including the adoption of high-speed trains like Vande Bharat and safety systems like KAVACH.
  • The establishment of Gati Shakti Vishwavidyalaya for skill development and capacity building in rail technology aligns with this goal, focusing on empowering the workforce with modern skills.

Implementation Status

• Out of the 40 recommendations made by the committee:
  • 19 were fully accepted, including the redesignation of the Railway Board Chairman as CEO, accounting reforms, and setting up RRSK.
  • 7 were partially accepted, such as empowering DRMs and implementing decentralization at the division level.
  • 14 recommendations were rejected, mainly due to opposition from unions or political considerations, especially regarding liberalization and private sector entry in passenger services.

Conclusion

• The Bibek Debroy Committee's recommendations laid the foundation for a modern, efficient, and financially sustainable Indian Railways.
• While several recommendations have been implemented, including structural changes, safety funds, and decentralization, others remain pending due to various challenges.
• The reforms introduced have made significant progress, yet the journey to fully modernize Indian Railways continues.

Q1. When was Railways introduced in India?

On 16th April 1853, the first passenger train ran between Bori Bunder (Bombay) and Thane, a distance of 34 km. It was operated by three locomotives, named Sahib, Sultan and Sindh, and had thirteen carriages.

Q2. When was Railways budget merged with the General Budget?

The Railway Budget was merged with the General Budget in 2017, after the government of India approved the merger in 2016.

News: Debroy committee charted the Railways’ path towards viability & competitiveness, but most recommendation still work-in-progress