 Good evening aspirants, welcome to the Hindu news analysis by Shankara Ace Academy for the date 3rd July 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. The link for the handwritten notes in the PDF format and the time stamping for the displayed articles is given in the description box and also in the comments section. Let's move on to the first news article discussion for today. Now this discussion is based on this editorial which is very important in the recent scenario. The editorial is authored by a retired chief justice and in this editorial author talks about the need for effective measures to end the torture culture in our policing system and this editorial has been written in the wake of recent events. The syllabus that is relevant to this discussion is given here for your reference. Now author has written this editorial because of the recent Satankulam case of Tamil Nadu. It is a case of custodial death where a father and his son were arrested and mercilessly trashed to death by the police for violating lockdown rules. In recent times we are seeing many incidents like this in India and also around the world. For example the George Floyd case of America where the police mercilessly trashed the so-called accused individuals leading to the death of that individual and even recently during lockdown periods in India many videos were circulated featuring the police beating up people with Lattis for violating lockdown rules and this was done even without proper inquiry by the police. Not only in the recent times but also in the past we have seen many cases of custodial deaths happening across the country and according to the author all these events show that we are living in a completely broken system of law enforcement because police is an important element in law enforcement. Author has worriedly noted that torture is an integral part of police culture in our country and it is nothing but a colonial hangover. See colonial hangover is a metaphor which is used to describe the practices that existed during colonial period and which are carried out even now also and by this here author means that the torture as a means was used by colonial police to suppress Indians and now it is still being continued as a means by police to suppress the citizens of our country in certain events. Even the official data of India accept that police torture is a reality. If you see the Crime in India 2018 report this report is a principal reference document of crime statistics that is published by the National Crime Records Bureau under Ministry of Home Affairs. Now this Crime in India 2018 report noted that there were 89 human rights violation cases registered against police personnel in the year 2018 alone and among these 89 three were related to deaths in custody and three were related to torture or causing injury. So this shows that police torture is not a rare event but it is happening now and then in some part of our country and some important NGOs and observers like the Asian Center for Human Rights, Amnesty International and People's Union for Democratic Rights etc. they have all found compelling cases related to torture in India. So all this shows that we are still in the colonial hangover of police torture for suppressing the citizens. So how to come out of this colonial hangover? According to the author stringent legal framework is needed to end this torture culture and one such framework is the principles of international law under the United Nations Convention Against Torture or in short UNCAT. See its full name is United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. This convention was adopted by United Nations General Assembly in 1984 and it came into force in 1987 and India became a signatory to this convention in 1997 but it has not ratified this convention yet and very recently we covered about this convention on our 30th June Hindi News Analysis. You can view it for a better understanding of the convention but what you have to notice even though this convention came into force in 1987 even after three decades India has not ratified this convention. Then like this in the year 2010 Lok Sabha also passed a prevention of torture but this bill was sent by Rajesh Sabha to a select committee for reviewing its alignment with the UNCAT but the committee recommended law was never adopted by the parliament and then again in the year 2017 central government asked the law commission to examine the issue of ratification of UNCAT and submit a report on the matter and accordingly law commission submitted its 273rd report and an accompanying draft torture law also under the title implementing UNCAT through legislation. So first let us see some of the important recommendations of law commission under this report. First and foremost law commission recommended the government to ratify UNCAT and law commission also defined torture in a broader way to include any physical mental or psychological injury in line with the torture definition of UNCAT. Additionally the report also recommended the government to consider torture as an injury that is either intentionally or involuntarily or even an attempt to cause such injury as an offense. Further law commission also recommended to amend the criminal procedure code of 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. Now CRPC was to be amended to accommodate provisions regarding the compensation to the victims of torture and then the Indian Evidence Act was to be amended to insert a provision regarding the shift of burden of proof to the perpetrators of the torture. Now this provision was to ensure that in case a person in police custody sustains injury whether due to the torture by police or not it will be presumed that those injuries have been inflicted by the police only and the burden of proof shall lie on the authority concerned to explain such injury. So it was expected that if the burden of proof is shifted to the perpetrators that is the police in this case then the incidence of torture will reduce. Apart from this law commission also recommended for imposing fine and stringent punishment like imprisonment for torture. It also recommended for putting in place an effective mechanism to protect victims of torture, complainants and also witnesses against the possible threats or ill treatment etc. But until now the draft will provided under this report by law commission and the recommendations are not implemented by the government and the reason for this is given by author that is all governments restrained from making law and torture because they enjoy the status quo where the police are used as a tool for self-preservation that is to protect the respective government officials and for that purpose they are required to use force which in turn results in torture. So that means a law on torture is the need of the hour. So why it is needed? It is needed for many reasons such as first is humanity because no person deserves torture by police whatever may be the crime. Only the judiciary can provide death as punishment and that too after proper inquiry into the case and not only because of humanity but also because our constitution prohibits torture because Supreme Court of India has noted that the articles of 20 and 21 of the Indian constitution which deals with protection in respect of conviction for offenses and then protection of life and personal liberty both these articles inhibits any form of torture or cruel treatment in human or degrading treatment. Because as you can see here article 20 mentions that no person shall be subjected to a penalty greater than what might have been inflicted under the law and force and in our country no law mandates the police to exercise torture. So that means torture is not permissible whether it occurs during interrogation or even on other times. So we can say that it is a moral commitment of the state to protect the citizens against custodial violence since it continues to be prevalent in our country. So based on this author suggests that ratifying the UN convention and following it up with a domestic law against torture can give shape to these moral and legal commitments. So finally author concludes by saying that what we need is a people's movement and in this movement the members of bar that is the advocates then media civil societies NGOs student groups all should participate so that it will force the government to bring out necessary legislative changes in the existing laws and it will also force the government to enact new laws for ending police torture and author is saying this based on the people's movement like Black Lives Matter Movement which was related to the police killing of George Floyd in USA. The Black Lives Matter Movement started a national debate in US with respect to radical reforms needed in the policing system. So based on this if in India also there is a movement like end torture then this will force the government institutions to legislate necessary laws and also ratify the UN cat for ending torture according to the author. So don't take this in a negative sense that author is asking to start a movement what author is asking is to come together for protecting innocence and individuals from the police torture. So that is all about this discussion with this we come to the end of this discussion the displayed practice questions will be discussed in the last session. This discussion is based on this news article which discusses about the recent ruling by the permanent court of arbitration in italian marines case. This case was initiated by Italy against India. So in this discussion we'll see the background about this case we'll see about the permanent court of arbitration and we also see about its jurisdiction. The syllabus that is relevant to this discussion is given here for your reference. Now first let us see the timeline of events regarding this italian marines case know that it started in 2012. In February 2012 two Indian fishermen who had left for fishing in a mechanized boat from Kerala were shot dead in international waters off the coast of Kerala and the ship from which the fishermen were fired upon was a oil tanker and it was identified as the Enrica Lexi. So once the Indian Navy came to know about this incident the ship was brought to Kochi in Kerala and then the polis and the coast guard personnel questioned the ship crew. Then it was found that two italian military personnel that is italian marines who were onboard the ship killed the Indian fishermen. So subsequently the then external affairs minister of India held talks with his italian counterpart and in this scenario India wanted the captain of the ship and the two italian marines who shot the fishermen to surrender to Kerala polis but Italy wanted these three persons to leave India but in return was ready to offer joint investigation by India and Italy on the incident but these talks failed between India and Italy and after this the two marines were remanded in judicial custody in India. So in subsequent days Italy moved the Kerala High Court to drop the case. Italy said that the marines have immunity from Indian law since the oil tanker that is the ship was flying an italian flag in the international waters. So in its petition Italy argued that under the principles of international law and conventions India had no jurisdiction to register a crime in connection with the incident. At the same time Italy also informed India that it had initiated criminal proceedings against the marines under its own law. So later in March 2012 the boat was released with certain conditions by the Colla Magistrate Court of Kerala but the judgment was set aside by the Kerala High Court. Then in April 2012 an out of the court settlement was reached between Italy and the owner of the boats and it was approved by the Kerala High Court but this out of court settlement was termed as illegal by the supreme court and the supreme court noted that the compromise was illegal and astonishing and it said that Italy was playing with the Indian process of law. Also supreme court observed that only the union of India had jurisdiction to proceed with the investigation and trial of the two italian marines. So subsequently in February 2013 the supreme court of India permitted the two marines to visit their country for participate in the voting process of italian election but those two marines did not return and Italy also refused to return the marines. So it affected the diplomatic relations between India and Italy and then in June 2015 Italy moved the permanent court of arbitration and initiated arbitral proceedings against India to pursue India to drop the criminal investigation against the italian marines which was being carried out in the Indian courts. So before discussing about the rulings of this permanent court of arbitration let us see about this court in detail. See the permanent court of arbitration or in short PCA is an inter governmental organization established by the 1899 Hague Convention on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes and it has 122 contracting parties and obviously India and Italy are contracting parties to this organization. I know that its headquarters is at the Peace Palace in the Hague of Netherlands where the International Court of Justice is also situated. But remember PCA is an observer at United Nations and it is not a main organ of United Nations like the International Court of Justice and it is also not a specialized agency of United Nations it is just an observer at UN. Here you should know that the literal meaning of arbitration is approaching a third party to help settling the disputes instead of going through the regular legal route. So PCA is not related to UN based on this it is more like a third party but an internationally recognized intergovernmental organization and just know that PCA secretariat is known as international bureau and it provides information and advice to the parties contemplating dispute resolution. Now this PCA facilitates arbitration conciliation that is mediating between disputing parties then it also facilitates fact-finding and other dispute resolution proceedings among various combinations of states, state entities, intergovernmental organizations and private parties and more importantly the final award or the order is binding on the disputing parties. So we can see that PCA facilitates interstate arbitration and one such interstate arbitration is this Marine's case which was initiated by Italy against India in the year 2015 and the arbitral proceedings were instituted under the annex seven of UN clause that is the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea. Recently also we saw about the UN clause when we discussed about South China Sea UN clause is an international treaty that provides a regulatory framework for the use of the world's seas and oceans and UN clause addresses even other matters such as sovereignty rights of usage in maritime zones and also navigational rights and remember India became a signatory to UN clause and we have also ratified UN clause convention in 1995. Apart from this UN clause has set rules for dispute resolution between state parties that is arising out of the interpretation or application of UN clause. So when signing UN clause or ratifying or exceeding to UN clause a state may make a declaration choosing one or more of these mechanisms for settling disputes and as you can see one among them is international court of justice. So if a state has not expressed any of these preferences then the arbitration under annex seven is the default means of dispute settlement. Additionally if the parties which are disputing have not accepted the same procedure for settlement of dispute then also arbitration under annex seven is the default means of dispute settlement and here note that the permanent court of arbitration handles the arbitration under this annex seven of UN clause and this is based on the agreement between PCA and the International Tribunal for the Law of Sea. So based on this only the arbitral proceedings were instituted under the annex seven of UN clause in 2015 against India by Italy and in this case Italy argued that both the marines were state officials who are exercising their official functions and the marines also claimed that they mistook the fishermen Indian fishermen for pirates and that the shooting occurred in international waters only. So the Italian marines held immunity as per article 87 of UN clause which discusses about freedom on high seas that includes freedom of navigation as well. Also Italy argued that India violated these provisions of UN clause and therefore it violated the immunity of marines when we instituted proceedings in our country against those Italian marines. But meanwhile India has argued that the arbitral tribunal does not have any jurisdiction over the claim regarding the immunity of Italian marines. India also noted that this case is not a dispute between parties hence the arbitral tribunal does not have jurisdiction but whatever may be the argument from India PCA continued its proceedings and now it has given its final order in this case and the order is in favor of Italy. PCA has observed that both the Italian marines enjoy immunity as state officials exercising their official functions hence the Indian courts cannot judge the Italian marines under Indian jurisdiction this means the order is a setback for India now based on this order Italy will resume its criminal investigation of this case which it initiated in the year 2012 itself and here you should also note one advantage for India which is the Italian marines have been asked to pay compensation to the victims families the boat owner and the crew members as per the tribunals award since the marines violated the freedom of navigation rights of the fishermen who were killed. So this freedom of navigation applies to both the parties not only to the Italian marines and according to this news article currently the government of India is studying this order to take further actions regarding this case so that is all about this discussion with this we come to the end of this discussion. Moving on to the next discussion based on this news article it talks about the falling trade deficit of India with respect to China so in this discussion we'll see about the balance of payment to understand this concept see balance of payment is a systematic record of all economic transactions between the residents of the country and the rest of the world in a particular year these transactions can be made by individuals firms and government bodies I know that in India the BOP account of our country is maintained by the reserve bank of India now within this balance of payment there are current account and capital account now this current account records all the transactions relating to export and import of goods and services then the capital account records all those transactions between the residents of a country and the rest of the world which cause a change in the assets or liabilities of the residents of the country or the government so capital account is concerned with financial transfers now when we export more we get more receipts and similarly when we import more we need to make more payments so the balance of trade will be a trade surplus when receipts are more than payments and this becomes a trade deficit when imports are more than exports so this is what happened with respect to China if you look at this figure given in this news article it shows India's export and import and India's trade deficit with respect to China from financial 2013 so very clearly you can see that India's trade balance with China is a deficit it simply means over the years the trade has been in favor of China as you can see India's trade with China has decreased from 89.71 billion US dollars to 87.07 billion US dollars in the year 2018 to 19 and during this period India's imports from China declined from 76 billion US dollars to 70 billion US dollars in the year 2018 to 19 and India's exports grew from 13.33 billion US dollars to 16.75 billion US dollars in 2018 to 19 so as a result of this India's trade deficit with China reduced from 63.05 billion US dollars to 53.57 billion US dollars in this same period and according to this news article India's trade deficit with China has further fell down to 48.6 billion US dollars in the financial year 2019 to 20 also so you can see that India's trade deficit is falling and this is favoring India in the recent years so that is all about this discussion with this we come to the end of this discussion the displayed practice question will be discussed in the last session now let's get to the next discussion which is based on this news article it talks about the recent approval by defense acquisition council which is worth 38,900 crore rupees and the procurement includes the procurement of 21 mi g 29 fighter jets for the Indian Air Force it also includes upgradation of 59 mi g 29s and also acquirement of 12 su 30 mki aircraft and other approved deals mentioned in this news article includes the pinaka ammunition astra missiles etc and the news article also talks about other missile systems but for today's discussion we'll focus in detail about the pinaka multi barrel rocket system then astra missile system and then finally we also see about defense acquisition council from the examination point of view the syllabus relevant to this discussion is given here for your reference first let us discuss about pinaka multi barrel rocket system or in short MBRS it was indigenously developed by the armament research and development establishment or in short ARDE this ARDE is a laboratory of DRDO under ministry of defense and know that pinaka comprises of a free flight artillery rocket that has a maximum range of 38 kilometer see an artillery system is a system which uses rockets as a means to launch projectiles at enemy troops and this pinaka also has different types of warhead and fuses it has a multi tube launcher vehicle a replenishment come loader vehicle and also a command post here note that a fuse is a weapon subsystem that activates the warhead mechanism in the vicinity of the target that is near the area of the target and in this the replenishment come loader vehicle comes into play once we run out of the rockets and by this vehicle the launcher can be quickly reused and in this picture you can see the pinaka MBRS as you can see it has two parts containing six rockets each and they are capable of firing in salvo mode that is they can simultaneously fire within 48 seconds and also know that because of the requirement of army for a free flight rocket with enhanced range the ARDE that is the armament research and development establishment has successfully developed pinaka mk2 rocket with a range of 60 kilometer and the existing launch vehicle and ground systems of the pinaka MBRS is used with minor modifications for firing this new pinaka mk2 rocket now let us see about astra see in Sanskrit and in Hindi astra means weapon or a missile and this astra is a beyond visual range class of air to air missile system and it is designed to be mounted on fighter aircraft and this missile is designed to engage and destroy a highly operating supersonic aircraft and also astra has all weather day and night capability now this missile is being developed in multiple variants to meet specific requirements and one among them is astra mk1 weapon system which is integrated with su 30 mk1 aircraft and it is being inducted into the Indian Air Force and in september 2019 the audio successfully flight tested astra from this su 30 mk1 platform and the trials were conducted by Indian Air Force against a target aircraft simulating or imitating all the possible threat scenarios and know that this astra has a range of more than 100 kilometers with modern guidance and navigation techniques the missile has mid-course guidance also and radio frequency seeker based terminal guidance now this enables the missile to achieve target destruction with pinpoint accuracy and additionally know that apart from drdo more than 50 public and private industries have contributed in building the astra weapon system so once it is inducted astra will be a force multiplier due to its accuracy and effectiveness in neutralizing the aerial threats now today's news is that the mig 29 procurement and upgradation has been approved by the ac and it will be done by russia and this has happened after indian defense ministers visit to russia for the victory day parade and this cooperation between india and russia is significant if we consider the tensions which india is having along the line of actual control with china these articles talks about the recent changes to russian constitution and the result of referendum which was held for popular approval that is public approval in russia so what is referendum it is the submission of a proposed public measure or an actual statute to a direct popular vote or public vote in simple words a proposed public measure or an actual statute is put to public vote and this process means referendum and it grants legitimacy to a policy position i know that the technical rules for the use of this referendum device differs from country to country and one of the popular opinions about using this device is that those in power use this device as one of the ways or the best way to resolve issues in their favor and mostly non-democratic states and authoritarian states have used referendum for the same purpose that is for resolving issues in their favor now the same criticism is faced by russian constitutional referendum which was held with respect to recent constitutional amendment to the russian constitution and in the vote russians were asked if they agreed or disagreed with the changes to the constitution and the result of the referendum is that almost 78 percentage of the voters agreed to the changes to the constitution that is they supported the constitutional amendment so let us see the important amendments to the russian constitution first know that the amendments include more than 200 changes to russian constitution and the most important one is which allows the current russian president Vladimir Putin to potentially extend his rule till the year 2036 see previously the russian constitution barred more than two consecutive presidential terms here the word consecutive is important and this has been removed by the amendment so now in russia president can only hold the presidency for two terms and it is not necessary to be consecutive terms then another important amendment is that in the case of a person who is already holding the presidency that is mr putin then previous terms will not count this amendment has the so-called zeroing effect on Vladimir Putin's presidential terms as it resets his elected terms to zero and so he can freshly contest in the 2024 elections and can be reelected for another two terms see here you should note that mr putin became president for the first time in 2000 then after his first two terms he became prime minister of russia but at that time also he remained as the center of power in russia then again in the year 2012 and then in 2018 for two constitutive terms mr putin was elected as president so based on this his second term will expire in 2024 now because of the amendment he can again serve for two more terms until the year 2036 because the president of russia serves for a term of six years so from the examination perspective we have to focus on the terms of office of russian president election method etc and you have to compare it with the indian president according to constitution because in main syllabus we have an important area mentioned as comparison of indian constitutional scheme with that of other countries so you have to take note of the changes made to constitutions of other countries whenever it appears in news and we have discussed these aspects related to russian constitution and indian constitution on our march 12th indian news analysis we request the viewers to view the discussion for knowing about these aspects which are very much important from the examination perspective now apart from these two amendments to russian constitution the other amendments are with respect to introducing a higher minimum pension and wages then the amendment also imposes a ban on same sex marriage because the amendment defines the institution of marriage as the union of a man and a woman so it puts a ban on same sex marriage in russia then the amendments also restrict the top officials in russia from holding dual citizenship so like this many important changes have been made to russian constitution and overall these changes allows mr putin to tighten his grip over russia and one of the criticisms around the referendum which was held is that there was no legal need for referendum since the proposed changes had already been approved by the parliament of russia and the supreme court of russia but still mr putin chose to put amendments to vote for the legitimacy and popular approval that is public's approval then apart from this there are also criticisms that opponents were barred from campaigning in the media before the referendum happened then it was also said that remote electronic voting was organized on an illegal basis see even though the way in which referendum was held is being criticized the result is favoring mr putin and the amendments now has got popular mandate here i should note that mr putin is already the longest serving leader in modern russian history since soviet dictator joseph starlin and now he has option to contest again but he has said that so far he hasn't decided to run for president again in 2024 but if he stays in power for two more terms then he will be the longest serving russian leader since peter the great who reigned russia for more than 40 years so these are the important points you should take from this analysis with this we come to the end of this discussion finally we have come to the last session for the day which is the practice questions discussion session the question asks which of the following statements is correct with reference to the pinaka multi-barrel rocket system recently same news first statement is it is a beyond visual range class missile system second statement is it is an air-to-air missile system designed to be mounted on fighter aircraft now these two statements talk about the aster missile not about pinaka multi-barrel rocket system so both statements are incorrect and during discussion we saw that pinaka comprises of a free flight artillery rocket having a maximum range of 38 kilometer if a and b are incorrect that means option d is also incorrect because it mentions as all of the above so the correct answer to this question is option c it was developed by the armament research and development establishment a laboratory of the defense research and development organization and that is why this option is correct now this next question is based on permanent court of arbitration the first statement mentions it functions under the legal and administrative jurisdiction of international court of justice now this statement is incorrect because it does not come under the jurisdiction of icj even though both of its headquarters are in the peace palace of haig in netherlands now the second statement is the final award of pc is binding on the parties to the dispute this means the final order is binding on the disputed parties and the statement is correct now the third statement mentions it is an observer at the united nations yes during discussion we saw this pc is an observer and it is not an organ of uan and neither a specialized agency and here before marking the correct answer be careful because the question asks for the not correct statements so the correct answer is option a one only now this question is based on balance of payment of india now this topic of balance of payment is very important in economics already in 2013 and 14 as you can see two questions have appeared now let us take today's question the first statement mentions balance of payments statistics systematically summarizes the economic transactions of an economy with the rest of the world for a specific period yes the statement is correct it correctly defines bop now the second statement is reserve bank of india is responsible for compilation and dissemination of balance of payments data in india the statement is also correct rba is responsible for this and here the question also asks for the correct statements so the correct answer is option c both one and two now let us take one main question based on gs paper two india is witnessing serious violation of human rights with respect to custodial torches in the light of the above statement analyze the relevance of un convention against torture to india by taking into account the 2017 law commission report on implementation of this convention through legislation you can write the answer and post it in the comment section we will review it and appropriate suggestion will be provided within a reasonable time frame