 Welcome to the Hindu news analysis by Shankarase academy for the day 21st September 2020. These are the list of news articles chosen for today's analysis. It has been provided along with the page numbers of different editions of Hindu newspaper. Let's move on to the first discussion. Our first discussion is based on this editorial article and this news article, which are with reference to the hate speech particularly in the television channels. So in this analysis we will see about the existing challenges in the legal provisions regarding this. We will see the suggestions of the author of this editorial and we will also see about the program code which is mentioned in the editorial and in the front page article. The syllabus relevant for this discussion is given here for your reference. Now these articles have appeared on the backdrop of action against the Sudarshan News channel by the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court has restrained the channel from continuing its broadcast of a series which is titled as Binda's Bowl. The Supreme Court has restrained the broadcast of this particular program because the channel aired evidently false statements in relation to UPSC civil service recruitment in India and it also specifically targeted the Muslim religious community by making the false statements. Now what this program did was it reportedly claimed that the upper age limit for Hindus who are attempting the civil service examination was 32 years while the age limit for Muslims was 35 and also the Muslims were entitled to nine attempts at the examination whereas the Hindus were entitled only to six attempts. It also stated that there is a jihadi conspiracy by Muslim community to infiltrate into the India's civil service. So these were the false statements made by the program. If you closely observe these statements you can see that the program did not recognize those Hindus who belong to other backward classes and schedule cast and schedule tribes. This is because as per the UPSC civil service examination notification as you all know the restriction on the number of attempts will not apply in the case of candidates from schedule cast and schedule tribes and at the same time the number of attempts permissible to the candidates belonging to other backward classes is nine attempts. So obviously the claims made by the program is totally false. So in the view of plainly hurtful content to the Muslim community the Supreme Court issued an injection that is it prohibited this particular program of the channel and according to the front page article the matter was scheduled for hearing today and we'll know more about the hearing tomorrow. So in this regard author has asked the judiciary to take this as an opportunity to differentiate between the hate speech and offensive speech that do not qualify as hate speech and he has also asked the court to define certain exemptions. Now this is because only if there is clarity in law there will be punishment for the offenders of that particular offense and that is why author notes that our laws present several complications when an attempt is made to distinguish permissible speech from hateful criminal conduct. So in this regard author has also given some suggestions on what should be qualified as hate speech. Here author uses the philosophical defense given by Jeremy Waldron who is a professor and expert in constitutional theory law and philosophy. According to Mr. Jeremy's definition hate speech refers to the utterances that incite violence, hatred or discrimination against people on the basis of their collective identity. Now this collective identity could be race, ethnicity, religion, gender or sexuality and this definition also includes speeches against categories of minorities who are vulnerable. Now here note that under this conception a merely offensive statement against one person or some statements against a small group of larger community would not qualify as hate speech but by this definition whatever spoken by the Sudarshan News channel in that program is a hate speech because it has attempted to denigrate or defame the entire Muslim community. So this is the suggestion given by the author but don't we have any laws in our country which punishes hate speech. Actually that is generally when we say hate speech laws we refer to two usually used important sections of Indian Penal Code. These sections are the section 153 A of IPC and then section 295 A of IPC and as you can see the section 153 A deals with the promoting of enmity between different groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth etc. and it also deals with the acts which are prejudicial to maintaining of harmony. And this next section 295 A it deals with the deliberated malicious acts which are intended to outrace the religious feelings of any class and as you can see for both these offenses the punishment is imprisonment which shall extend to three years or fine or even both. But according to the author there is an issue with these provisions. The author who is a practicing advocate at the Madras High Court has noted that both these sections are vaguely worded in the context of hate speech. Even if you note there is no actual mention of the term hate speech in these provisions. Author has also observed that these provisions are frequently invoked to quell or suppress speech that offends even the belief of one single individual. But as you can see here the sections actually deal with the offenses against a class or group of persons. Here you should also note that as per article 19 of Indian Constitution freedom of speech and expression can be reasonably restricted in certain grounds and these grounds are the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India then the security of the state and friendly relations with foreign state, public order, decency or morality then freedom of speech and expression can be reasonably restricted in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offense. So based on these grounds only the freedom of speech and expression can be reasonably restricted. That is why author has mentioned that using the sections 153A and 295A of IPC for speeches against one individual or a small group of a larger community is opposed against the reasonable restrictions enumerated in the article 19 clause 2 of the Constitution and it is particularly opposed against the public order and morality provisions of this article. So in this regard author has noted that this morality should be constitutional morality and it should not be societal morality. Now in addition to the IPC sections you should also know about the other legal provisions. The author has talked about the legal provisions related to how the cable TV channels should operate in terms of their content and in this regard the articles talk about the program code. So what is this program code? See we have the cable television network rules of 1994. These rules are based on the cable television networks regulation ordinance of 1994 and the subsequent act of 1995. Now here the rules 6 of this 1994 rules deals with program code and the rules 7 deals with advertising code. You can simply today go and see these two provisions and you can observe whether actually the TV channels adhere to these rules in their programs and advertisement or not. So today's focus is the sub rule 1 under rule 6. It prescribes what should not be in a cable service and with respect to today's discussion C and D are relevant. C deals with the contents which attack religions or communities or even the words which are contemptuous of religious groups. Then D deals with the contents which are obscene, defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive in windows and half truths. So that means the Sudarshan channel has clearly violated these two provisions. But author feels that even this program code has an issue that is it is also vaguely worded like the provisions in the Indian Penal Code. So he has asked the Supreme Court to shape the contents of the program code into a feasible constitutionally committed model. Now these are the points you should take from the editorial. Now from the front page article you should note that it talks about a Code of Ethics brought by the News Broadcasters Association. See earlier on September 18, the Supreme Court sought suggestions from the News Broadcasters Association and also the centre to strengthen the association's self-regulatory powers. So in this regard, NBA has given two main suggestions. One is to include its Code of Ethics into the program code of the 1994 rules which we just saw. And then second, NBA has suggested that the amended program code should be made applicable and binding for all NBA members and even to the non-NBA members. So let us wait and see whether Supreme Court provides any clarity on the definition of hate speech and whether the rules regarding the contents published on TV is made stringent or not. So these are some of the information with reference to these two articles. Whether if we come to the end of this discussion, the displayed practice question will be discussed in the last session. Now the next discussion is based on this news article which is with respect to the pro-democracy protests and the democratic actions in Thailand. See the news was that the democracy defenders are calling for the Prime Minister of Thailand to resign. The Prime Minister of Thailand is Prayut Chanochha and they are also calling for reforms to the monarchy. So in this regard, let us see about Thailand. Here know that establishment of a unified Thai kingdom dates back to mid-14th century and previously Thailand was known as Siam till 1939. Also, Thailand is reportedly known as the only Southeast Asian country that was never colonized by a European power. Further, this nation saw a bloodless revolution in the year 1932. This led to the establishment of a constitutional monarchy from an absolute monarchy system. So at present, constitutional monarchy is in operation in Thailand. Here just note that constitutional monarchy system of government is a monarchy sharing power with the constitutionally organized government. Now with respect to Thailand, there is a Prime Minister who is the head of the government and then there is a Monarch who is the chief of the state and the Monarch is from the royal family. Now the Monarch has some important powers while other executive powers are with the Prime Minister. Also know that Thailand has a bicameral legislature system that is it has a lower house and also a upper house. Now the state of affairs in Thailand is in such a way that the royal family promotes parties that are having members from military who are pro-royal that is those who support the royal family. But actually a party in Thailand which is pro-royal is observed as anti-democratic. But the present Prime Minister is a pro-royal supporter and he is a former army chief. And in Thailand, any such military members based party was criticized as consolidating powers to the king and there was more centralization of powers and curtailment of freedoms. That is why the present protesters are demanding reforms with the monarchy or reforms in who can be the chief of state. But interestingly here you should note that the name of Thailand actually means the land of the free but still they are under constitutional monarchy. So in this regard let us also know about the geography of Thailand. Thailand is located southeast to Myanmar. It is in southeast Asia and it shares land boundary with Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia and Malaysia. It also shares maritime boundary with Andaman Sea and the Gulf of Thailand or the Gulf of Siam. Agriculture and tourism are the most important industries in Thailand. The biggest island of Thailand is Phuket Island as you can see in this map. Now Thailand will be in news at times because of the proposed canal across the Isthmus of Krah in the southern Thailand. Here Isthmus refers to a narrow strip of land with sea on either side. This also forms a link between two larger areas of land. And here Krah Isthmus connects the Malai Peninsula to the Asian mainland. Now the specialty of the proposed canal is that it would create a bypass to the state of Malacca and it will also shorten the shipping times around Asia. So these are some of the information with reference to this news article. Now this discussion is based on this opid article which has been written on the special day of, international day of peace. Each year this day is observed around the world on 21st September that is today. So on this day let us discuss this article about how the great powers in global politics actually show little responsibility towards achieving the global peace. The syllabus relevant to this discussion is given here for your reference. First let us see some facts related to this international day of peace. It was established in 1981 by the United Nations General Assembly. And further in 2001 the General Assembly unanimously voted to designate this day as a period of non-violence and ceasefire. So on this day the UN invites all nations and people to honour a cessation of hostilities and also commemorate the day through education and public awareness on issues related to peace. Here cessation of hostility means ending the conflicts or warfare. And just know that this year's theme for this day is shaping peace together. But if we ask ourselves whether the world is at peace the answer will be no. Because when we look around we could see several countries which are marred or ruined by war, violence and insecurity. We can take the example of countries like Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Turkey, Somalia, Iraq. These countries are often in news and all for the wrong reasons only. That is due to the violence war etc. And according to the world's population review which is released by a US based think tank these countries have suffered at least 1000 deaths each due to militarized attacks and battles in the last year itself. And not only these countries according to the author of this article over 25 countries in the Maghreb and Sahel regions of North and West Africa are also being ravaged by wars. Here note that the Maghreb or Maghreb region is a collection of countries which is commonly termed as Northern Africa. This area lies along the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean and the current definition of this Maghreb region includes the nations like Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and also the disputed territory of western Sahara. And the Sahel region is the vast semi arid region of Africa which separates the Sahara desert to the north and the tropical savannas to the south. We can say that this region acts as a transition zone between the Sahara desert and the savannas. Now according to the author of this article these regions of Africa are devastated by wars. And the author also notes that at the end of 2019 the armed conflicts then persecution and other reasons have almost displaced 79.5 million people that is 7.95 crore people around the world. So what is the reason for this? According to the author the reason for this situation of the world is the way in which the present international system is structured. According to the author this international system poses enormous obstacles to peace because the violence is actually escalated by the great powers which have the military might and the economic might. But this is actually contradictory to what should happen because as you know the United Nations Security Council which was formed in 1945 it was supposed to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations. And the five permanent members which are the China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and United States they are supposed to investigate any dispute that might lead to international friction and they have to formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate the movement of armaments etc. But whether these countries actually do this is a big question because this is not the reality. We can see that countries like USA, Russia and China which are the P5 countries who are supposed to uphold peace and stability instead they actually fuel instability in the most ongoing wars. Now to substantiate this viewpoint author has taken the example of Yemen. United Nations has declared Yemen as the world's worst humanitarian disaster and in Yemen the factions which are involved in war are supported by the US, Saudi Arabia and UAE on one side and Iran on the other side. And the similar situation we can see in Syria and Libya also where US and Russia backs the factions which involve in the war. And along with these countries nowadays China which is the new Cold War rival of US has also entered the fueling game. According to the author the small arms from China actually enable the ethnic violence and extreme human rights abuses from South Sudan to Pakistan and Myanmar. Additionally China's hegemonic expansionism in the region have also significantly raised risks of military clashes in Asia. This is very clear from the ongoing India-China border dispute and the South China Sea dispute etc. So from this what can we conclude is that the objectives of the big powers are quite clear which is they are fueling instability in poor countries to safeguard the regimes which are favourable to them and by fueling this instability they also raise their profits by selling arms. Here the author has not stated these statements just like that he has stated these based on facts. Like we can take the report by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute that is CIPRI. According to the report of CIPRI the international transfers of major arms during the period 2015 to 2019 has increased 5.5 percentage compared to 2010 to 2014 period. And the largest exporters of arms during the past 5 years where USA, Russia, France, Germany and China and as you can see among these 4 are P5 countries. The report also says that the flow of arms to the Middle East has increased with Saudi Arabia clearly being the world's largest importer. So what is the solution for these problems? Here author notes that the targeted micro level diplomatic initiatives cannot solve the issue. Rather we should diagnose the core problem at a macro level. Here the core problem is the irresponsible actions of great powers and their allies. So obviously the solution is changing this unjust power structure which privileges the great powers and then a more equitable world order has to be established. But apart from all these we must realise that the COVID-19 pandemic is a reminder which has reminded all of us that what happens in one part of the planet can also impact people everywhere. The pandemic has also made us realise that we are not each other's enemies rather our common enemy is a virus. And if you compare this with this year's theme of International Day of Peace which is the shaping piece together you can understand its importance. That is like how we are as a humanity are fighting the virus like that together we have to fight for peace also. Or we should take measures that will ensure peace all around the world. So that is all about this discussion. Now this next discussion is based on these two news articles which talks about a notice for the no confidence motion given against the Rajasabha deputy chairman. The notice has been given by 12 opposition parties. They accuse the deputy chairman of Rajasabha of violating parliamentary procedures while trying to pass the farm sector bills in a hurry. So in this context let us discuss about the no confidence motion and the procedure for the removal of chairman and deputy chairman of Rajasabha. The syllabus relevant to this discussion is given here for your reference. See normally when we say no confidence motion it is with respect to the council of ministers. We know that our constitution provides for parliamentary system of government. So the fundamental principle under the working of parliamentary system of government is the principle of collective responsibility. And as you know according to article 75 of Indian constitution the council of ministers shall be collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. It means that the ministry stays in office so long as it enjoys the confidence of the majority of the members of the Lok Sabha. In other words the Lok Sabha can remove the ministry from office by passing a no confidence motion. Now when the Lok Sabha passes a no confidence motion against the council of ministers all the ministers have to resign. Now this includes even those ministers who are from Rajasabha. Now in this regard note that even though article 75 does specify that the council of ministers shall be collectively responsible to Lok Sabha it should be noted that the constitution of India does not mention anything about either the confidence motion or the no confidence motion. Rather it is the rules of procedure and conduct of Lok Sabha which defines the no confidence motion along with its procedure. Now according to the rule 198 of the rules of procedure and conduct of Lok Sabha a no confidence motion is a motion expressing the want of confidence in the council of ministers. So what is the procedure for this? First know that a motion of no confidence against the council of ministers can be introduced only in Lok Sabha this means it cannot be introduced in Rajasabha and as per the rules of procedure of Lok Sabha any member of the house can move a no confidence motion and the member did not even give a reason for moving a no confidence motion and the rule 198 of the rules of procedure mentions that a member of the house shall ask leave to make the motion when called by the speaker of Lok Sabha and the member who is asking for such a leave have to give a written notice of the motion to the secretary general of Lok Sabha by 10 a.m. on the day she proposes to move that motion. Here notice that if the notice is received after 10 a.m. then the notice is deemed to be received on the next day on which the house sits. Now here if the speaker is of the opinion that the motion is in order then the speaker shall read the motion to the house and the speaker requests the members who are in favor of this motion to rise in their place that is to stand up in their place so if at least 50 members support the motion the speaker declares that the leave is granted so if leave is granted the speaker may allot a day or even a part of a day or even several days for the discussion of the motion and this is done after considering the state of business in the house and then at the appointed hour of the allotted day for the motion the speaker puts every question necessary to determine the decision of the house on the motion so if the motion is passed in the house the government is bound to vacate the office so what is the importance of this no confidence motion see it is an important tool against the council of ministers in the Lok Sabha because if 51% of the members of the house vote in favor of the no confidence motion then the motion is passed and the government is deemed to have lost majority in the house and thus the government has to resign from office so generally here note that if the government wants to prove its majority in the house it can bring the vote of confidence but if the opposition wants to prove that the government of the day does not have majority in the house it brings in the no confidence motion but our today's discussion is with respect to deputy chairman of Rajesh Sabha so before that we should know about the chairman of Rajesh Sabha you know vice president of India is the ex-officio chairman of Rajesh Sabha so he can be removed as the chairman of Rajesh Sabha only when he is removed from the seat of vice president of India he can be removed by a resolution of the Rajesh Sabha which will be passed by an effective majority and most importantly this should be agreed by the Lok Sabha that means Lok Sabha should pass it that is the resolution with a simple majority and here note that a 14 days advance notice is to be given before removing the resolution now here just note that many books of Indian polity mention that the removal of vice president needs absolute majority which is half of the total strength of the house but this is not correct because the majority required for the removal of the chairman is effective majority that is the total strength of the house minus the vacancies so remember that the resolution for removal of vice president requires an effective majority in Rajesh Sabha but our today's discussion is with respect to deputy chairman so how a deputy chairman is removed here note that she may be removed from office by a resolution of Rajesh Sabha which is moved after 14 days advance notice of the intention to move the resolution and such a resolution should be passed by a majority of all the then members of the house that means this resolution also requires an effective majority so that means what today's news article mentions is actually technically incorrect because what the opposition parties did was they wanted to pass a no confidence resolution not a no confidence motion and the resolution is the resolution which we just discussed so that is all about this discussion now this next discussion is based on this article which talks about the proposed amendments to the foreign contribution regulation act of 2010 for this purpose the foreign contribution regulation amendment bill of 2020 has been introduced in Lok Sabha we have already elaborately discussed about FCRA on our 7th and 13th September in the news analysis please view that video for a better understanding about the FCRA 2010 now today we will just discuss about the proposed amendments to this act first of all know that FCRA is a law of government of India which regulates the receipt of foreign contributions or the aid from India to the Indian territories so what are the proposed amendments firstly the bill aims to add public servants to the list of persons who are prohibited to accept any foreign contribution see under the original act certain persons are prohibited to accept any foreign contribution and these include election candidates editor or publisher of a newspaper judges government servants members of any legislature or political parties etc now this bill aims to add public servants also to this list now here public servants include any person who is in service of the government or who is receiving the pay of the government or remunerated by the government for the performance of any public duty now the second proposed amendment is that the bill aims to prohibit the transfer of foreign contribution to any other person see under the original act the foreign contribution cannot be transferred to any other person or entity unless the person or entity is also registered or such a person or entity has already obtained prior permission to accept that foreign contribution but now this bill aims to prohibit this transfer of foreign contribution which is already received to any other person now the third amendment is that the bill aims to add a provision allowing the central government to permit a person to surrender their registration certificate which is the registration of fcrs certificate and this the government can allow the surrender of the certificate only after an inquiry and after it is satisfied that such a person has not breached any provisions of the act and the management of its foreign contribution has been vested in an authority prescribed by the government only now the next amendment is that the bill aims to add any person seeking prior permission or registration or renewal of registration of fcrs certificate to provide the other number has to be provided as an identification document so that person should provide the other number of all its office bearers directors or key functionaries if they seek prior permission registration or renewal of registration now in case of a foreigner they must provide a copy of passport or oca card for identification in place of other now the next amendment is that the bill aims to extend the suspension period by an additional 180 days see currently under the act the government may suspend the registration of a person for a period not exceeding 180 days now this bill aims to add this period to another 180 days so these are the some proposed amendments to the fcr 2010 with this we come to the end of this discussion now we have come to the last session the practice questions discussion session now this first question asks consider the following statements regarding international transfer of major arms now the first statement given is the largest arms exporter during 2015 to 2019 are the united states Russia France Germany and China see generally with respect to the transfer of major arms or the import or export of major arms for these data we look at the CEPRI report that is Stockholm international peace research institute report and according to the new data from CEPRI the largest exporters of arms during the past five years that is 2015 to 2019 where USA Russia France Germany and China so this statement is correct and here note that between 2010 to 14 and 2015 to 19 exports of major arms from the USA has increased by 23 percentage and this has raised the USA's share of total global arms exports to 36 percentage but major arms exports by Russia has decreased by 18 percentage in this same period here if you see the question asks for the incorrect statements if you know statement one is correct then you should not be in answer and you can eliminate options A B and D and the correct answer is option C 2 and 3 only now let us see why 2 and 3 are incorrect statement 2 mentions India and Pakistan remain the largest arms importer in the world over the past five years now this statement is incorrect because Saudi Arabia was the world's largest arms importer in 2015 to 19 its imports of major arms has increased by 130 percentage compared with the previous five year period and it also accounted for 12 percentage of global arms imports in 2015 to 19 and here note that India was the second largest arms importer in the world over the past five years so India is in the second position whereas Pakistan is in the 11th position now statement 3 mentions due to persistent UN efforts arms imports by countries in the Middle East decreased by more than 50 percentage between 2010 to 14 and 2015 to 19 now this statement is incorrect because the arms imports in the Middle East has actually increased it has increased by 61 percentage in the same period and the Middle East has accounted for 35 percentage of total global arms imports over the past five years here also note that half of USA's arms exports in the past five years actually went to Middle East and half of exports from US to Saudi Arabia now this next question is a two statement question first statement is the law commission of India has never dealt with the subject of hate speech now this statement is incorrect because the report 267 of law commission of India which was submitted in 2017 is on the subject of hate speech and in this report the commission has proposed sections 153C and 505A to be included in IPC and also corresponding procedural changes have to be made in the first schedule to the CRPC that is Code of Criminal procedure now here we have given you the proposed sections that is 153C and 505A for your reference now statement one is incorrect now the second statement is the term hate speech is mentioned in the constitution of India now this statement is also incorrect because it is not mentioned in constitution of India now here both the statements are incorrect but here the question asks for the correct statements so the correct answer is 151 or 2 now this next question is with reference to motion of no confidence in the house of people of Indian parliament that is motion of no confidence in Lok Sabha first statement is any member of the house can move a no confidence motion against the council of ministers now this statement is correct this is as per the rules of procedure in Lok Sabha and additionally that member need not even give any reason for moving the no confidence motion now the second statement is a special majority is required for a no confidence motion to be passed now this statement is incorrect because it requires only a simple majority not a special majority and here the question asks for the incorrect statements so the correct answer is option B2 only now let us take on previous your question on no confidence motion this question was asked in prince 2014 the first statement is there is no mention of no confidence motion in the constitution of India this statement is correct there is no mention of no confidence motion it is mentioned in the rules of Lok Sabha now the second statement is a motion of no confidence can be introduced in the Lok Sabha only now this statement is correct it can be introduced only in Lok Sabha not in Rajesh Sabha and here the question asks for the correct statement so the correct answer is option C both 1 and 2 now this next question asks equator passes through which of the following countries Thailand, Indonesia, India, Brazil Ecuador now if you know equator does not pass through India you can easily eliminate option A and D but remember that tropic of cancer passes through India so from the remaining options you can say it passes through Indonesia also and equator also but it does not pass through Thailand so the correct answer is option B2, 4 and 5 only because equator passes through Indonesia, Brazil and equator among these given countries now this next question is with reference to FCR 2010 first statement is it prohibits government servants and editors of newspapers from receiving any foreign contribution now this statement is correct this is according to section 3 clause 1 of FCR 2010 now the second statement is it comes under the purview of Reserve Bank of India now this statement is incorrect because FCR is meant to ensure that foreign contribution is received from legitimate sources and it is utilized for legitimate purposes only by any person so in this regard this act is an internal security legislation so even though it is always related to financial legislation it falls into the purview of home ministry and not under RBI and here the question asks for the correct statement so the correct answer is option A1 only with this we come to the end of today's Hindi news analysis if you like the video don't forget to like comment and share do subscribe to Shankar IAS Academy YouTube channel for more updates related to civil service examination preparation