📰 The ‘white’ brothers of Nilgiris
The first ‘white’ tiger found here a few months ago has a brother who’s also white
•The rare, pale-skinned ‘white’ tiger was spotted for the first time in the Nilgiris earlier this year by a wildlife photographer. It now turns out that this animal is not the only one of its kind. It has a family, and its brother is also ‘white’, though its mother and sister have normal coats.
•The family of four was sighted spending some quality time together in the Nilgiris Biosphere Reserve by M. Santhanaraman, additional government pleader for Forest departm-ent at the Madras High Court and Dr. C.P. Rajkumar, a member of the Tamil Nadu State Wildlife Board.
•“Of the four, two are white tigers. We have observed that in this group, one is the mother and three are cubs that have grown up to be as big as the mother. One cub is a female with a regular coat, while the two white cubs are males,” said Mr. Santhanaraman.
•“The presence of one white tiger had been reported earlier by a wildlife photographer. Now we have sighted two white tigers, and they are part of the same litter,” he said, adding that such ‘white’ tigers in the wild are a rare phenomenon. Neither of these animals are 100% white. They are pale, with coats much lighter than the usual orangey yellow.
•“It may be due to genetic aberration,”said H. Basavaraju, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and the head of the forest force in Tamil Nadu. “The two tigers are pale probably because of inbreeding. The recessive genes may not have been fully expressed. That is the reason these tigers are not fully white but pale,” said a wildlife official.
•“It might be only a matter of time before the two white cubs part from their mother. They are as big as their mother already. Once they attain adulthood, they could easily become the biggest tigers in the landscape,” said Dr. Rajkumar.
•It is believed by wildlife experts that the tigers’ coats are pale due to reduced levels of the pigment melanin in a phenomenon called ‘leucism’.
📰 ‘Delhi LG thinks he is the Viceroy’
He is simply President’s agent: counsel
•The Lieutenant Governor of Delhi is not a “Viceroy” but simply an agent of the President whose powers depend on the pleasure of the President, senior advocate P. Chidambaram submitted on behalf of the Delhi AAP government in the Supreme Court on Wednesday. “He is not what he thinks he is today – a Viceroy,” Mr. Chidambaram said in his opening statement to a five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.
•While the court agreed that the LG cannot intervene in the day-to-day functioning of the democratically elected government, Mr. Chidambaram said the decision to have an elected government in the National Capital was made because the people had found it necessary.
•The 69th Constitutional Amendment, introducing an elected government to the National Capital, was passed by a “very, very special majority of the people’s representatives because they felt that there was something deficient in the Constitution.”
•“This court has to look into what were the sentiments of the people to bring in these special provisions for Delhi. Your Lordships should not interpret the special provisions in such a way that it diminishes democracy. You should interpret the provisions to advance a republic and democratic form of government...,” Mr. Chidambaram said.
📰 SC recalls order to take up delay in MoP
CJI says that after the Constitution Bench has gone into all this in the NJAC issue, there is no need to go into them now
•Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra, heading a three-judge Bench, on Wednesday openly disagreed with the decision of a two-judge Bench to publicly hear, on the judicial side, the reasons for the government’s delay in finalising the norms for appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts, and appointment of regular High Court Chief Justices.
•The three-judge Bench recalled a decision of a two-judge Bench of Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit on October 27 to investigate the government’s reasons for “lingering” over its job of finalising the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointment of Supreme Court and High Court judges.
•That Bench observed in a written order that it is going to be about two years since a five-judge Constitution Bench, after striking down the government’s NJAC (National Judicial Appointments Commission) law, tasked the Centre in December 2015 with the job of drafting a fresh MoP to replace the current one with the objective of making judicial appointments transparent. However, no ground was covered in the past months despite the constant to-and-fro of MoP drafts between the Supreme Court Collegium and the Union Law Ministry.
•Justices Goel and Lalit issued notice to Attorney-General K.K. Venugopal to explain why the government has dawdled in both the MoP issue and the lack of appointment of regular Chief Justices in High Courts. At present, seven High Courts are led by ‘Acting’ Chief Justices. In some High Courts, such Chief Justices have been continuing for months.
•The Bench of Justices Goel and Lalit had scheduled the next hearing for November 14. However, the case was listed before a new Bench of CJI Misra and Justices A.K. Sikri and Amitava Roy.
•On Wednesday, as soon as the Bench convened, CJI Misra made clear his disagreement with the order passed by Justices Goel and Lalit.
•“After the Constitution Bench has gone into all this in the NJAC issue, there is no need to go into them now ... these are not matters to be gone into on the judicial side at all. That’s all there is to be said,” he said at the very beginning of the hearing.
•Senior advocate K.V. Vishwanathan, appointed amicus curiae in the case by Justice Goel’s Bench, told the CJI that the issue revived by his brother judges on October 27 was one of “great concern”.
•“We are aware of it,” the CJI replied.
•“There is a feeling that there is a delay. The number of vacancies in High Courts is shocking. There is a right to access to justice,” Mr. Vishwanathan persisted.
•“And we know how to deal with it ... What do you know about what we have done about it?” the CJI said.
•“There is no need to proceed in view of the judgment of the NJAC,” the CJI recorded in a short order, disposing of the matter.
A marked departure
•The CJI’s refusal to plunge headlong into a collision course with the government is a marked departure from the open-court confrontations his predecessor T.S. Thakur used to have last year with the government over the MoP and the rising vacancies in the higher judiciary.
•In one such hearing in August 2016, Justice Thakur launched the sharpest ever public attack on the government by asking whether the Centre intended to bring the entire judicial institution to a “grinding halt” by sitting on recommendations of the Collegium for appointment and transfer of judges to High Courts. He made it clear to the Centre that the apex court would not shy away from a confrontation with the government if driven to a corner.
•In full view of the members of the Supreme Court Bar, litigants and the media, Justice Thakur cautioned the government that if matters continued in the same strain, the court would be “forced” to judicially intervene. However, the hearings lost steam after Justice Thakur retired early this year and the stalemate over the MoP continued.
📰 From farm to fork
We must place nutrition at the centre of the debate on improving our food systems
•Many people are not eating the right food. For some, it’s simply a decision to stick with food they enjoy, but which isn’t too healthy. This is leading to an increase in non-communicable diseases. This in turn leads to major burdens on our health-care systems that have the potential to derail the economic progress that is essential for the poor to improve their lives. For others, it’s about limited access to nutritious foods or a lack of affordability, leading to monotonous diets that do not provide the daily nutrients for them to develop fully. Part of the reason nutrition is under threat worldwide is that our food systems are not properly responding to nutritional needs. In other words, somewhere along that long road from farm to fork, there are serious detours taking place.
•Fortunately, there is now a major international effort to improve global food systems and link those improvements to better nutrition and diets. Last year, in Rome, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN (FAO) and the World Health Organisation convened an International Symposium on Sustainable Food Systems for Healthy Diets and Improved Nutrition. It was a follow-up to the Second International Conference on Nutrition in 2014. While these big conferences might seem somewhat distant to the realities faced by food producers, farmers, fishers, supply chains and processors, they are placing nutrition at the centre of the debate on improving our food systems, which is where it needs to be, because while improving nutrition is a personal responsibility, it also begins at the desk of the policymaker and at the end of a pitchfork.
•Indeed, the vast majority of the food we eat is produced by smallholder farmers, many of whom are poor and undernourished themselves. Improvements to food systems must be achieved in ways that benefit their livelihood and nutritional needs. The Sustainable Development Goals have a target that recognises that smallholders provide a critical entry point for building dynamic rural economies and they need to be resourced with inputs and technology and linked to higher market value.
•Diets are changing, but not always for the better – and that’s a big worry. Bringing together the key players in the food system makes sense because the policymakers who can push the nutrition agenda forward need to hear what works and what doesn’t from the people who grow our food, and from the people who transport it, process it, market it and sell it.
•This week in Bangkok, FAO and other UN partners are bringing together experts on nutrition and major players in the food systems sector from across Asia and the Pacific. The outcomes of the Asia-Pacific Symposium on Sustainable Food Systems for Healthy Diets and Improved Nutrition will provide further support to the aims of the United Nations Decade of Action on Nutrition (2016-2025). We must all work together to equip our food systems to produce and deliver more nutritious food. Only then can the goal of achieving zero hunger be realised.
📰 China urges India to join Belt and Road Initiative
Shed objection to CPEC, says China
•China on Wednesday counselled India to shed its objections to the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and take advantage of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which had already drawn wide international support.
•“You and your colleagues have asked this question before and it shows that India is quite wavering on the issue of the Belt and Road Initiative,” said Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying.
•Ms. Hua was responding to a question on remarks by the Russian ambassador to India backing a dialogue between New Delhi and Beijing on the BRI.
•“I think you must be very clear (that) since the BRI was proposed by President Xi Jinping, progress has been made smoothly with strong outcomes.”
•India was among a handful of countries that had skipped attendance in Beijing of the Belt and Road Forum in May, objecting to the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which passed through Kashmir.
•Referring specifically to CPEC, Ms. Hua, in a veiled reference to India, said the project did not target “third countries” or prejudice China’s position on territorial disputes. “We also said many times that the CPEC corridor is an economic cooperation. It is not targeted at any third country and does not involve territorial disputes”.
•“We hope that countries and parties with shared vision will work with us to allow practical cooperation to bring more benefits to our peoples.” Signalling China’s openness to India’s participation, Ms. Hua said: “We remain quite open and inclusive to cooperation involving the BRI.”
📰 Telengana leads state wise ease of doing bus
Ranking is dynamic and frozen as positions could change
•Telangana is currently atop the yearly state-wise ranking on assessment of implementation of the ‘Business Reforms Action Plan’ (BRAP) in 2017. The final ranking is likely to be released in January, 2018.
•Telangana (with an implementation score of 61.83%) is followed by Haryana (54.03%), Odisha (45.70%), Chhattisgarh (45.43%), and West Bengal (44.35%) — completing the top five. However, the ranking is dynamic and till they are frozen, these positions could change due to intense competition between States.
•The last date for uploading evidence of reforms implemented was recently extended from October 31 to November 7, 2017, according to the Commerce and Industry Ministry, which is the nodal body at the Centre for the exercise which is part of the ‘cooperative and competitive federalism’ approach of the NDA government. This year’s assessment includes 372 reforms, up from 340 last year.
Uploading evidence
•Observing that many States/Union Territories (UT) had not started uploading the evidence of implementation of these reforms on the BRAP portal, the Ministry recently asked the States/UTs to start uploading them before the deadline.
•The broad areas of assessment this year include paper-less courts, online single window system, online tax payment, contract enforcement, land availability and allotment, obtaining electricity and water connection, enablers for transparency, tax, labour regulation, construction permits, environmental registration as well as commercial dispute resolution and online systems for property registration. They also include registration and grant and renewal of licence under the Factories Act, approval of plan and permission to construct/extend/or take into use any building as a factory, registration and renewal of boilers, as well as compliance inspections under various laws.
‘Joint topper’
•Telangana was the joint topper with Andhra Pradesh, in the ranking last year. However, Andhra Pradesh (score of 18.01%) is currently ranked 14th. Gujarat, ranked third last year, is now number eight with a score of 41.94% while Madhya Pradesh, which was fifth last year, is now 22nd with a score of 10.22%.
•In the recently released World Bank Group’s Doing Business report that assessed reforms implemented in 190 countries from June 2, 2016 to June 1, 2017, India was ranked 100th among 190 countries, up from 130th last year.
📰 Right to privacy as right to life
It is important for the courts to examine disability as a ground for the grant of bail
•In the Supreme Court’s right to privacy judgment (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India), Justice D.Y. Chandrachud held: “Life and personal liberty are inalienable to human existence… The human element in the life of the individual is integrally founded on the sanctity of life… A constitutional democracy can survive when citizens have an undiluted assurance that the rule of law will protect their rights and liberties against any invasion by the state and that judicial remedies would be available to ask searching questions and expect answers when a citizen has been deprived of these most precious rights.”
Violation of right to life
•In 2014, Delhi University professor G.N. Saibaba was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and held in Nagpur Central Jail till the Supreme Court granted him bail in 2016. In March 2017, he was convicted by the Gadchiroli sessions court to life imprisonment for alleged offences under the same Act, and returned to custody in the Anda cell of Nagpur Central Jail. His appeal against the conviction is pending before the High Court in Nagpur. While the grounds of his conviction are debatable, the immediate concern is regarding the question of miscarriage of justice on other grounds. Mr. Saibaba has severe disabilities and multiple related health conditions and has high support needs. Placing him in solitary confinement with no support violates his right to life, bodily integrity and autonomy under Article 21, although his conviction only imposes restraints on personal liberty. This inhuman treatment is punishment far in excess of the sentence awarded by the court.
•It is now time to ask searching questions about the sentence, and appeal to the court for the application of constitutional due process so as to not endanger his right to life.
•The deplorable conditions in Indian prisons are well known. It is settled law now that prisoners may be deprived of personal liberty according to procedure established by law, but that does not include a derogation of their right to dignity. The privacy Bench reiterated the words of Justice Krishna Iyer in the Prem Shankar Shukla case: “The guarantee of human dignity, which forms part of our constitutional culture, and the positive provisions of Articles 14, 19 and 21 spring into action when we realise that to manacle man is more than to mortify him; it is to dehumanise him and, therefore, to violate his very personhood, too often using the mask of ‘dangerousness’ and security…” and that the right to life cannot be restricted to mere “animal existence”. How do we begin to understand the sanctity of life, dignity and bodily integrity for a person with disabilities? If handcuffing is an extraordinary and excessive restraint on an ordinary prisoner, what constitutes excessive restraint beyond the writ of law for a person with disabilities?
Respect for diversity
•The Supreme Court holds unequivocally that in adopting the Constitution, the people of India do not surrender the most precious aspects of the human persona — namely life, liberty and freedom — to the state on whose mercy these rights would depend. Each of these aspects — life, liberty and freedom — must be considered together and/or severally as the case may be. Where there is a sentence on personal liberty, the citizen does not surrender his life to the mercy of the state.
•If, as the right to privacy judgment asserts, privacy “as an integral part of the right to human dignity is comprehended within the protection of life as well”, it is necessary for every court to develop a sensibility towards and understanding of what constitutes human dignity and protection of life for persons located differently in the social order. For, an important aspect of this judgment, which is now law in India, is respect for human diversity and pluralism.
•Albeit with reference to a different case, the court observed that neither the fact that very few persons bear certain attributes nor the test of “popular acceptance… furnish a valid basis to disregard rights which are conferred with the sanctity of constitutional protection”. Mr. Saibaba may well be the only person in his situation. That in itself is reason for the courts to intervene actively in his favour and remove him immediately from this precarious situation of precarity and irreversible harm.
Entitled to bail
•In the light of the decision of the Supreme Court on the right to privacy, particularly its comments on the Suresh Kumar Koushal judgment on Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code and the habeas corpus case, one cannot help but hope that the Nagpur High Court, in considering Mr. Saibaba’s appeal against his conviction, similarly examines the judgment and deliberates on the relationship between fact, law, popular rhetoric and proportionality therein.
•Most importantly, however, it is hoped that the court examines disability as a ground for the grant of bail, as distinct from (but related to) “medical grounds”. This entails, according to the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2013, “respect for inherent dignity, individual autonomy… and independence of persons” and “accessibility”. Section 2(s) of the Act defines a person with disability as “a person with long term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which, in interaction with barriers, hinders his full and effective participation in society equally with others.” In conditions of custody, such persons must be protected from any hindrance to the exercise of bodily integrity and autonomy with dignity — this lies at the core of his right to privacy. Unavailability of such a guarantee within custodial facilities entitles the prisoner with disabilities to bail.
•Mr. Saibaba’s predicament is best described in his own words: “I am frightened to think of the coming winter… As temperature goes down excruciating pain continuously in my legs and left hand increases. It is impossible for me to survive here during the winter that starts from November… I am living here like an animal taking its last breaths. Somehow eight months I managed to survive. But I am not going to survive in the coming winter. I am sure. It is of no use to write about my health any longer...
•“No one understands 90% disabled person is behind bars struggling with one hand in condition and suffering with multiple ailments. And no one cares for my life. This is simply criminal negligence, a callous attitude.” (Extract from his letter to his wife dated October 17, 2017.)
•At the time of his conviction and the proceedings so far, we did not have the constitutional wisdom of the privacy Bench before us. In weighing the question of restraint on personal liberty against the risk to life, bodily integrity and dignity, the court scene in The Merchant of Venice spins into view: “Therefore prepare thee to cut off the flesh/Shed thou no blood, nor cut thou less nor more/But just a pound of flesh.” A Daniel, come to judgment.
📰 Banking on legislation
The ‘bail-in’ clause, in a draft bill, would change the relationship between the customer and the bank
•The recapitalisation of public sector banks (PSBs) through bailouts, be they as budgetary allocation or some sort of bond issue, has evoked much discussion. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is cited as adequate punishment for defaulting borrower companies. However, under the code, the resolution process has brought little succour to banks as the recovery rate from defaulting companies has so far been merely 15-20% of the original amount lent. Meanwhile, there is no attempt so far by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to issue guidance to PSBs to blacklist these entities from getting further loans or prevent their managements from retaining a majority equity stake during the resolution process as penalty for the huge haircuts being taken by banks.
•The result is that banks have been continually reporting losses in each successive quarter. Six PSBs have already been placed under prompt corrective action by the RBI. Even the State Bank of India was still stuck with non-performing assets worth ₹1,88,068 crore as on June 2017.
Deposits are at risk
•According to the Financial Stability Board (FSB) Peer Review Report August 2016, 63% of the financial investments ordinary Indians make are within the banking system; PSBs account for 63% of the market share while private banks control 18%. Given the shaky financial condition of most public banks, deposits in these banks are very much at risk. In the best case scenario, there could be a government bailout. Other possibilities are the transfer of their assets and liabilities to a bridge service provider, a merger with an existing bank, or even liquidation. But none of these options guarantees safety of customer money.
•What adds to the disquiet is the Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance (FRDI) Bill, 2017 that was referred to a joint parliamentary committee this August after cabinet approval. This covers bankruptcy of businesses such as banks and insurance. Financial resolution includes solutions for banks facing ‘material’ or ‘imminent’ risk to viability depending on their capital and asset worth.
•This Bill also introduces the provision for a “bail-in”, whose purpose is to provide capital to absorb the losses of a bank and ensure its survival. Here, survival does not mean safety of depositors’ money, but restoration of capital of the bank. The bail-in empowers the proposed Resolution Corporation to cancel a liability owed by the bank or change the form of an existing liability to another security.
•All of us are aware that money in a savings or fixed deposit account is a liability owed by the bank to its customer. The bank promises to repay the money when demanded by the customer. Since the customer has not taken any security from the bank when handing over his money, legally, the customer is an unsecured creditor of the bank. With a ‘bail-in’, the bank simply refuses repayment of a customer’s money or instead issues securities such as preference shares (with no guarantee of fixed dividends) to a customer. This is in lieu of his deposits which are then used for recapitalisation of the bank.
•The only money owed to depositors that cannot be bailed-in is the amount covered by deposit insurance. The Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, 1961 which insured deposits worth one lakh for each depositor has been repealed by the cabinet. The FRDI Bill further empowers the Resolution Corporation to decide the amount insured for each depositor. Thus, it is possible that the insured amounts will not only vary for customers in different banks, but may also be different for different customers of the same bank.
No longer safe
•The ‘bail-in’ clause changes the nature of relationship between the customer and the bank. It would mean that money is no longer safe in a bank. An account would lose its sovereign guarantee and instead become an investment. Putting away money in a bank would be akin to buying shares of a company or units of a mutual fund. The customer would need to monitor the level of toxicity of his bank with respect to its losses and accordingly keep switching bank accounts.
•The banking saga has all the ingredients of a full-fledged Shakespearean tragedy. Out of the three protagonists, the government as the majority shareholder and the corporate borrower are wearing their victimhood as a badge of honour. Whereas, the real victim, the customer, is the unsung hero coerced into parting with his money.
•The reality is that without customer deposits, a bank cannot carry on its business. It has to be understood that banking business is not the same as any other business. A bank customer cannot be treated on a par with an unsecured creditor of a regular business. The customer is not privy to the lending decisions in a bank unlike any vendor or investor dealing with a company. Hence the rules for bankruptcy of a regular business cannot be applied to bank failures. For the sake of justice and fairness to its citizens, the government must take a stand and defy the FSB’s diktat on the ‘bail-in’ clause.
📰 Demonetisation and the cash-dependent informal sector
The demonetisation anniversary should nudge us to think differently about the informal sector
•I am a critic of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s demonetisation initiative not because I belong to the Opposition, but because of demonetisation’s disruptive force, especially since India’s economy includes a large, cash-dependent informal sector. Demonetisation’s initial objectives remain unmet. Black money did not stay out of the banking system, terrorism continues, and counterfeit currency is still in circulation. As time went on, dreams of a cashless society were weaved into the pro-demonetisation narrative. Informality became a dirty word while anything digital was feted. However, reports emerged of extensive damage to the informal economy and, partly due to its linkages with the formal sector, economic growth took a hit. As opposed to a surgical strike on black money, demonetisation turned into a carpet-bombing of the informal economy. All is not lost, however. This anniversary offers an opportunity to think differently about the informal sector and its contributions to the broader economy and to the lives of millions of Indians.
Unwarranted contempt
•My academic training and professional experience have typically taught me about the desirability of reducing the size and scope of the informal economy. However, the contempt with which demonetisation’s supporters portrayed the informal economy gave me pause. It was perplexing that we were pouring scorn over a part of the economy that supports livelihoods for 80-90% of Indian workers and accounts for an estimated 40-50% of GDP. It isn’t by choice that a casual labourer does back-breaking work at a construction site or on a farm for a few hundred rupees a day. What drives us to laud the “intention” of enforcing the economy’s formalisation without a full and proper assessment of the costs and benefits of the informal economy? If you listen to Mr. Modi and his supporters and, frankly, to many experts, the informal sector is parasitic, escapes government regulations and evades taxes. Let’s bring “them” into the tax net, goes the refrain. Tax arguments and poor working conditions in the informal sector are frequently employed to push for a rapid formalisation of the economy. It may be time to revisit some of these arguments.
•If demonetisation was about going after tax evaders, then the government effectively treated the entire informal economy as a homogeneous construct. While the informal economy can enable illicit activities and create a safe space for tax evaders, it also supports the livelihoods of millions of workers who have no opportunities in the formal economy. These are the roadside vendors, marginal farmers, construction workers, cobblers, artisans, fishermen, landless labourers, etc. When we talk about demonetisation as a means of increasing formality, we need to keep the lives of these workers in mind. A 2009 OECD study on informal economies concluded that enforcing formality can be counterproductive and lead to an increase in poverty. The 2016-17 Economic Survey (Vol. 2) admitted as much by pointing out the spike in demand for MGNREGA work in the aftermath of demonetisation.
•The persistence of the informal economy is a global phenomenon, and the “shadow economy” is estimated to be approximately 23% of world GDP. In many countries, employment in the informal sector is growing faster than in the formal sector. In India, according to the 2015-16 Economic Survey: “Of the 10.5 million new manufacturing jobs created between 1989 and 2010, only 3.7 million — about 35% — were in the formal sector.” This indicates that the informal sector is not some aberration that we can simply wish away. It is an integral part of India’s economic framework and we need to pay far more attention to it.
Deal with it
•With a burgeoning youth population, India will need to create millions of jobs. This comes at a time of heightened concerns over the impact of automation on the availability of decent, well-paying, formal sector jobs. In such a scenario, neglecting the linkages between the formal and informal sectors would be unconscionable. While developing an appropriate policy framework for the informal economy will take time, some ideas appear obvious. For example, strengthening government schools and health facilities could disproportionately benefit poor and low-income children and families who likely operate in the informal economy. Another idea would be to focus on improving productivity of informal enterprises by creating awareness of good business practices and prevailing market conditions. Reducing the threat of coercive government regulation and action can also help informal workers earn a living without constant harassment of police and inspectors. There is no dearth of ideas on how to improve the functioning of the informal sector. But first we need to be open to the idea that informal is not abnormal. It is normal and it is here to stay. We have to learn to deal with this reality.
📰 Capital crisis: on Delhi's deteriorating air quality
The Centre and States must urgently address farm residue burning in north India
•Delhi’s air quality deteriorates with unfailing regularity at this time of the year, with large swathes of north India in the grip of a suffocating smog, but the State governments that can make it easier for millions to breathe do not act with any sense of urgency. That it has turned into a public health emergency in the capital, with the air quality index touching extremely hazardous levels in some parts, necessitating the closure of primary schools, has further lowered its standing. It is unconscionable for governments, through indifference and inaction, to subject citizens to such toxic air, and cause extreme suffering especially among people with respiratory ailments and impaired lung function. The smog that envelops the region is exacerbated by the burning of biomass in Punjab and Haryana, and the winter atmosphere is marked by weak ventilation. An analysis of local sources by IIT-Kanpur last year pointed to construction dust, vehicular pollution, and domestic and industrial emissions as other major factors. Clearly, the burden of such chronic problems has outweighed the benefits conferred by measures such as the ban on Deepavali crackers, and in the past, the shift to compressed natural gas for commercial vehicles and restricting car use to odd and even number plates on alternate days. A comprehensive solution demands that the governments of Delhi, Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, assisted by the Centre, address farm residue burning and construction dust.
•The post-monsoon — as opposed to pre-monsoon — burning of rice and wheat residue releases maximum aerosols that contribute to the volume of PM2.5, which gets embedded in the lungs. Automation of farm operations leaves root-bound crop waste after machine harvesting, running to millions of tonnes, requiring a solution of scale. Sustainable residue removal cannot be achieved by the farmers alone, and requires help from the state machinery. Here, DelhiChief Minister Arvind Kejriwal should be commended for his initiative to discuss the modalities of joint action with the Punjab and Haryana governments. The national capital needs a major greening effort. Unpaved surfaces raise dust levels as in all Indian cities, but civic agencies ignore the problem. There is every reason to think that even the Ministry of Environment’s orders issued in 2015 under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 to comprehensively green Delhi’s road margins and open spaces were not pursued seriously. Shifting more of the city’s travel to comfortable public transport can cut fine particulates in congested areas and improve the air for residents. Many such initiatives were taken up by China in its cities to reduce exposure to PM2.5 that produces morbidity from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and leads to premature death. Only a determined response to the crisis can spare Delhi of its infamous tag as one of the most polluted cities on the planet.
