 Dear viewers, an announcement, Shankar IAS Academy is conducting Free Main Scholarship Test 2020. The scholarship test consists of 5 main questions based on daily current affairs starting 27th July till 31st of July. Every day one main question will be given from the Daily Hindu News Analysis. And the question will be published in our Daily Hindu News Analysis video starting 27th July till 31st of July 2000. To know more about the scholarship test, click on the link below. Now let us begin with the Daily News Analysis for the date 24th of July. The list of news articles along with the page numbers of 5 different editions is given here for your reference. Let us now begin our analysis. This news article is about the concerns raised by some communities in Tripura regarding the settlement of blue refugees. In this context, let us discuss in detail about the Blue Riyang Tribes, the refugee crisis and finally the Quadripartite Pact that was signed previously this year. The syllabus that is relevant to the analysis of this news article is given here for your reference. See, Riyang who are traditionally known as Blue is one of the 21 Scheduled Tribes of Tripura. Riyang is recognized as a particularly vulnerable tribal group in the state of Tripura. They are the second largest tribe of Tripura after the Tripuri tribe. See, the blue refugees were earlier living in Mizoram and in the Chittagong Hill Tracks in Bangladesh. In 1997, the political body of the Blue's, the Blue National Union passed a resolution demanding an autonomous district council under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution in West Mizoram. The blue tribe were present in significant numbers in West Mizoram but Mizos were the major tribe in Mizoram. So, the demand for an autonomous district council by the Blue's was opposed by the Mizoram government and even by the Young Mizos Association. So, this created a communal tension between the Blue and Mizos communities. Following ethnic tensions in Mizoram, around 5000 families from the Riyang Tribes in Mizoram fled to Tripura in the year 1997. They were housed in temporary camps at a place called Kanchenpur in North Tripura. Finally, the repatriation and the resettlement process of these tribes from Tripura started in 2010 but only a little success was achieved. Till 2014, around 1600 families returned to Mizoram in different batches. In 2018, an agreement was signed between the Union government, the state governments of Mizoram and Tripura and from the representatives of Blue Riyang refugees. As a result, the aid given to these refugee families was increased substantially. Also, some 328 families returned to Mizoram under this agreement. Even then, there had been a sustained demand for most Blue Riyang families that they may be allowed to settle down in Tripura. This is because of their apprehensions about their security in Mizoram. Following the negotiations for a permanent settlement of the Blue refugees, Quadripartite Pact was signed in 2020 in the month of January. This Quadripartite Agreement involves four parties, the Union government, the state governments of Mizoram and Tripura and the representatives of Blue Tribes. Under this new agreement, around 34,000 Blue refugees will be settled in Tripura and the center would give 600 crore rupees to Tripura for rehabilitation and all-round development of Blue refugees. The Blue people would be included in Tripura's outer list and they would get all the rights that the normal residents of the states would get. And they would also be able to enjoy the benefits of social welfare schemes of the center and the state governments. So, under this agreement, each of the displaced families would be given land and residential plots and they would also receive a fixed deposit, free ration and some money to build their house. However, if you see the indigenous non-tribal communities of Tripura organized protests against this Quadripartite Agreement. So, this is in brief about the issues surrounding the Blue refugees of Tripura. Now, with this background information, let us discuss this news article. This news article says that the non-Brews of Tripura have proposed six places for settling the displaced blues from Mizoram. And they also set a limit of 500 families to be accommodated in two subdivisions. The blues are distributed among seven relief camps in these two subdivisions. The Blue leaders also believe that these proposals go against the agreement and they have asked the state government to honor the Quadripartite Agreement. Though this is a cause of concern, let us hope that the agreement and the peaceful negotiations will end the 23-year-old Blue Riyang refugee crisis. This is all about the discussion of this news article. To summarize, we have seen about the Blue Riyang Tribes, then about the Blue refugee crisis. And finally, we saw about the Quadripartite Pact that was signed in January 2020. Now, have a look at this practice question. Let us move on to the next news article. This editorial is written in the context of the recent comments made by the External Affairs Minister of India Idea Summit 2020. The minister has said that non-alignment is no more a relevant concept and multi-polarity is the current necessity in the world. So, in this discussion, let us see what do we mean by non-aligned movement, its relevance and how multi-polarity is a threat to this non-aligned movement. The syllabus that is relevant to the analysis of this editorial is given here for your reference. First, let us see what is non-aligned movement. See, non-aligned movement was created and founded during the collapse of the colonial system and with the rise of many independent nations in Africa, Asia, Latin America and other regions of the world. So, simply non-aligned movement was staying away from the big two powers which is USA and the U.S. Soviet Union and refraining from joining any military alliance. The Bandung Conference of 1955 is considered as the founding conference of this non-aligned movement. As just said, the condition for membership is that the states of the non-aligned movement cannot be a part of the multilateral military alliance such as the NATO. However, the idea of non-alignment does not mean that countries remain passive or even neutral in international politics. On the contrary, from the founding of the non-aligned movement, its stated aim has been to give a voice to developing countries and to encourage their concerted action in the world affairs. See, during the early days of the movement, its actions were a key factor in the decolonization process. This led later to the attainment of freedom and independence by many countries. So, throughout its history, the movement of non-aligned countries has played a fundamental role in preservation of world peace and security. Know that the principles that govern the relations among the large and small nations are known as the Ten Principles of Bandung and these principles were proclaimed during the 1955 Bandung Conference. Unlike the United Nations, the non-aligned movement has no formal constitution or there is even no permanent secretariat. The founders of this non-aligned movement have preferred to declare it as a movement but not an organization in order to avoid any sort of bureaucratic implications of the organization. So, the primary objectives of the non-aligned countries focus on the following, support of self-determination, national independence, then sovereignty and territorial integrity of states and also opposition to apartheid, then non-adherence to multilateral military packs, then independence of non-aligned countries from the great powers or block influences and rivalries, then struggle against imperialism and all its forms and manifestation, then struggle against colonialism, neocolonialism, racism, foreign occupation, domination, disarmament, non-interference into the internal affairs of states, then peaceful coexistence among all the nations, then rejection of the use or threat of use of force in international relations, then strengthening of the United Nations, then democratization of the international relations, then socio-economic development, restructuring of the international economic system as well as international cooperation on an equal footing. So, all these are the objectives of the non-aligned countries, that is the non-aligned movement. From these objectives we can understand that the NAMM countries which are newly formed sovereigns came together to stop the evil of colonialism and to uplift the democratic nature of the world and voice of the smaller countries. Now, coming to the role of India in NAMM, see India played a decisive role in founding NAMM and it is even considered as the leader of NAMM because of its democratic credentials, also because of its population size and the economy. However, India still towards the erstwhile Soviet Union in the 1970s and then towards the United States in 2000s questioned the non-alignment credentials of India. And in recent years, if you see the participation of India and NAMM as just become ornamental, that is more of a formality for India. Even in the last two summits which were held between 2014 and 2020, India was represented by the Vice President and not by the Prime Minister. It is even said that the latest foreign policies of India are not consistent with NAMM. Why? Because we can see that India siding with United States and Russia and it is joining and organizing many military drills with both these countries. So, you can see that the present government is not really interested towards this concept of non-alignment. In the same context, the external affairs minister of India said that non-alignment as a concept belonged to a bygone era, that is it is no more relevant. And he said that multipolarity in the world necessitated that India would have to take a definite stand and even take risks on issues such as connectivity, maritime security, terrorism and climate change. However, he also said that India does not reject non-alignment in its entirety and that while it would no longer remain disentangled from difficult decisions, it would not compromise on its independence. More importantly, the external affairs minister said that India has never been part of an alliance system nor it will never be a part of any alliance system. Also, he stated that even the United States must look beyond its present alliances and engage with more multilateral arrangements. So, from all this, we can tell that instead of non-alignment, India is proposing for multi-alignment. Why? Because we can see many evidences in our current international policies where India is close to all the power centers. For example, India shares close ties with Russia. At the same time, India also shares close ties with the United States. And if you see India is one of the very few countries which maintains good relations with all the Middle East power centers like Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel. And not just that, India maintains very cordial relations with most of the African countries. So, this is what the new alignment of India is, which is multi-alignment not non-alignment. And this editorial gives the recent example, the United States offered to mediate India and China over their border tensions and it even called for India and the United States to jointly counter China. But if you see, India has rightly chosen to raise its tensions with China only in bilateral talks with China. One more significant thing which happened was the Indian government's outreach to Russia, which included a visit by the Defense Minister of India. Further, if you see India participated in the Russia-India-China Trilateral Conference. And if you see the external affairs minister of India has commented that India should also seek to build coalitions with the middle powers like European Union and Japan. So, from all these evidences, we can see that India is trying to have a multi-alignment approach without compromising its independence and without compromising its strategic autonomy and decision making at the same time. So, you can make use of these examples to show that how India is multi-aligned at present. As a conclusion, the author of this editorial notes that a time of crisis often clarifies the priorities. Why? Because right now India is facing a double crisis, one is battling the novel coronavirus pandemic and on the other side, India is also managing the Chinese aggression at its borders. So, a message from India at this point of time that India will have multi-aligned approach can be seen as a one where India tries to carefully calibrate the balance in its international relations. This is all about the discussion of this editorial. To summarize, we have seen what is the non-aligned movement, its relevance and how multi-polarity is a threat to the non-alignment movement. And also, we saw the present context of India's international relations where India stresses to have a multi-aligned approach. And we saw some examples from the editorial in this regard as well. Now, have a look at this practice question. Let us move on to the next news article. This discussion is about the recent Rajasthan assembly crisis. Today, we will see the background of this issue and what is the stand of supreme court in this matter. The syllabus relevant to the analysis of all these news articles is given here for your reference. See the problem started in the state of Rajasthan when its deputy chief minister, Mr. Sachin Pilat, rebelled against the chief minister, Mr. Ashok Gillott. The deputy CM was unhappy with the current functioning of the government of Rajasthan. So, he protested against the chief minister and he asked for a change or he pressured the high command of the Congress to change the chief minister. Because, if you see, the Indian National Congress is the ruling party in the state of Rajasthan. Because of this, the deputy chief minister skipped the Congress legislature party meetings on 13th and 14th of July and along with them, by supporting this decision around 18 MLA's also did not attend the meeting. So, the chief minister of Rajasthan removed or dismissed the deputy chief minister from the posts of Rajasthan deputy chief minister and the state Congress committee. Following these events, the Rajasthan Congress complained to the speaker of Rajasthan Legislative Assembly that the MLA's wanted to jump parties. That is, they wanted to switch from one political party to another. So, based on this complaint, the speaker served notices to 19 Congress MLA's including Sachin Pilat asking them why they cannot be disqualified and speaker gave them time until 17th of July to reply. Here, note that the notice was served under the 10th Schedule to Constitution which is popularly known as Anti-Defection Law. This schedule lays down the process by which legislators may be disqualified on the grounds of defection by the presiding officer of a legislature. Know that switching sites is one of the grounds of disqualification under this paragraph of 10th Schedule. But here, the issue is the 19 MLA's expressed that they do not wish to join or support the opposition political party in Rajasthan. Hence, they argued that it does not amount to defection and so it is beyond the scope of 10th Schedule. So, 19 MLA's approached the High Court of Rajasthan on 16th of July challenging the speaker's action of initiating disqualification proceedings. They also challenged the constitutional validity of PERA 21A according to which voluntarily giving up membership of political party is a ground for disqualification. Subsequently, the High Court heard this matter but if you see the High Court reserved the verdict on petition and requested the speaker to defer the decision on disqualification proceedings by extending the time for reply till the verdict is delivered. Subsequently, the speaker approached the Supreme Court against the order of the High Court and it is for this issue that this news article has appeared where the Supreme Court has made few observations in this case. So, this is the news today. See, in this petition, the speaker argued that the disqualification proceedings before the speaker under the 10th Schedule are the proceedings of the legislature and it cannot be interfered with by the courts. This was based on PARA 62 of 10 schedule. It mentions that all proceedings under PARA 61 shall be deemed to be proceedings in parliament or legislature of a state within the meaning of article 122 or article 212 respectively, meaning that the proceedings cannot be called in for questioning on the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure. Also, if you see the petition by the speaker stated that the High Court order insults the law that has been laid down by the Supreme Court in Kyoto, Olohan versus Zakelu case law of 1992. It is because the Supreme Court noted that judicial review cannot be available at a stage prior to the making of a decision by the speaker or chairman and a quiet emit action would not be permissible. Here quiet emit means injunction or an order that restrains an anticipated wrong. So, fearing that the speaker or chairman will decide the disqualification on illegality or publicity, the courts cannot interfere. Further, if you see interference would also not be permissible at an interlocutory stage of the proceedings that is the order is given provisionally during the course of a legal action. In this matter, as you can see it is during the course of disqualification proceedings. So, based on this money the speaker has argued that the notice to the MLA's is not the final determination or the decision on disqualification, but it is only a commencement of the proceedings. So, the High Court cannot decide on the validity of anti-defection notices. But if you see the Supreme Court refused the speaker's plea to stop the High Court from deciding on the validity of the notices. And if you see the Supreme Court even questioned that can expressing dissent amount to voluntarily giving up the party membership under paragraph 2, 1A of 10 schedule and does it invite anti-defection proceedings. See, the speaker can initiate proceedings when there is defection. So, first the 19 MLA's defector have to be proved. And as we initially saw, the MLA said that they did not wish to join another party. They were just dissenting within the party that is intra-party. So, based on this fact, the Supreme Court judges noted that this is not a simple matter since the elected representatives are threatened with disqualification for expressing their dissent. So, this issue is larger and it is about democracy. And so, the Supreme Court judges noted that this requires a prolonged hearing. So, let us wait and see how the Supreme Court decides in its next hearing on this issue. This is all about the analysis of this news article. To summarize, we have seen in brief about the events that led to the current Rajasthan Assembly crisis and the observations made by the Supreme Court in this regard. Meanwhile, if you see the Congress party is confident of retaining its majority if at all a flow test has to be conducted in Rajasthan State Legislative Assembly. Now, have a look at this practice question. Let us move on to the next news article. This news article talks about the comet Neovice. Know that it is a comet visiting from the most distant parts of our solar system. And it has made its once in our lifetime close approach to the sun on 3rd of July 2020. If you look at this picture, you can see a long tail. See the very close passage where the sun is cooking the comet's outermost layers and this causes gas and dust to erupt off its icy surface. And hence you can see a large tail of debris out of this comet. So this comet is putting on a spectacular display across the world. The observers across the world are racing to see this comet before it speeds away into the depths of space. Because according to NASA, once the comet speeds away into deep space, it will not be seen for another 6,800 years. And today's news article talks about one such photograph taken by the scientists at ISRO's Liquid Propulsion Systems Center. Know that this comet was discovered in March 2020 by NASA's Neovice mission. This mission assists NASA's efforts to identify and characterize the population of near-Earth objects. It is also characterizing more distant populations of asteroids and comets to provide information about their sizes and compositions. Here know that news that is the near-Earth objects are comets and asteroids that have been nudged or attracted by the gravitational attraction of the planets in our solar system into the orbits that allow them to enter Earth's neighborhood. So this is in brief about this news article. Now if you look at this question, this question has been framed for you to know about the difference between asteroid and comet. The question is, what is our common to the two objects of space known as comet and asteroid? Both are made up of frozen gases, rock and dust. Both orbits the sun, both develop tail as they approach the sun. Know that comets are cosmic snowballs of frozen gases, rock and dust, which are roughly the size of a small town. And they orbit the sun. When a comet's orbit brings it close to sun, it heats up an image dust and also gases into a giant glowing head that is larger than most planets. The dust and gases form a tail that stretches away from the sun for millions of kilometers. So from our discussion so far, you can tell that all the three statements are correct with respect to comets. But if you look at an asteroid, it is a small rocky object that orbits the sun. They are smaller than a planet, but they are larger than meteoroids. And most asteroids in our solar system are found in the main asteroid belt, which is a region between Mars and Jupiter. But some asteroids do hang out in other locations around the solar system. So they are basically rocky objects, they are not made up of frozen gases. Also statement three is not true in case of asteroid. So here only the second statement is correct, both orbit the sun. Hence the correct answer is option C, two only. So let us move on to the next news article. This question about bi-elections has been framed based on this news article. This news article mentions that ECI, after consultation with the central government, has decided to differ the bi-elections to one Lok Sabha seat and several seats of various state legislative assemblies. And this is due to the difficulties caused by COVID-19 and the ongoing monsoon season. So in this context, let us see about bi-elections. See bi-elections are discussed in part nine of the representation of the People Act of 1951. Now it is important to know some of the important provisions and the silent features of the representation of People Act of 1951 from Maine's perspective because it is mentioned in your general studies paper to syllabus. Know that the concept of bi-elections is applicable to the elected members of the council of states, Lok Sabha, state legislative assemblies and state legislative councils. And these are the relevant sections which discusses about the bi-elections of all these four houses. See a member who is elected to one of these four houses is expected to complete the fixed tenure. But when the seat becomes vacant or when the seat is declared vacant before the expiry of the term or if the election is declared void, then such seats are filled through bi-elections in all these four houses. So section 147 deals with bi-elections of the council of states that is Rajesh Sabha and section 149 deals with bi-elections related to Lok Sabha and section 150 deals with bi-elections related to the state legislative assemblies. Now if you look at both these Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies, we know that some seats are reserved for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in both these houses. So if a particular seat which is reserved for SC or ST becomes vacant, then only a member from the SC or ST community can fill that vacancy. This is one additional provision that you need to know in case of Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies. And section 151 deals with the bi-elections of the state legislative councils. Now know that bi-elections will not be applicable in two cases. One case if the remainder of the term of a member in relation to a vacancy is less than one year. That is within one year if the elections have to be conducted and if a seat becomes vacant, then bi-elections will not be conducted. The next condition is that if the election commission after consultation with the central government decides that it is difficult to hold the bi-election, then bi-elections may be deferred. So it is based on this second condition only. Now the election commission of India has decided to defer the election to a Lok Sabha seat and several state legislative assembly seats. So this is all that you need to know about the concept of bi-elections. Now look at this question. This question is completely different from what we have discussed now. Usually you can expect such questions in UPSC. The question is as per the representation of the People Act of 1951, bi-elections can be conducted for which of the following offices. During our discussion, we saw that bi-elections can be conducted in case of vacancies of the elected seats to the four houses. But if you look here, the elections to the office of president and the office of vice president is discussed in the constitution, not in the representation of the People Act of 1951. Moreover, if you see there is no concept of bi-election in case of both these offices. Article 54 deals with the elections of president and article 66 deals with the elections to the office of the vice president. Now look at number 3 and number 4, nominated member to Lok Sabha, nominated member to legislative councils of the states. First know who are nominated members. See a nominated member is a person who is not elected through elections. Rather is nominated by the executive, president in case of Lok Sabha and the council of states and the governor in case of state legislative assembly and state legislative councils. So, if the post of the nominated member falls vacant, then again a new member will be nominated. There is no concept called elections in case of a nominated member. So, remember this fact. So, if you go by logic, you can easily arrive at the answer which is option D, none of the above. Because the question tells as per the representation of the People Act, whereas we know that the elections to the president and vice president are mentioned in the constitution. And there is also no concept of bi-elections in case of nominated positions. So, if you are not sure with the facts, try to go by logic. But even for that you need to know some basic facts. And UPSC frequently asks such questions wherein you need to apply your logic as well as basic facts. Now, let us move on to the next news article. This question is about open credit enablement network. The question is open credit enablement network recently seen in news is in the context of. Here the correct answer is option C, MSME, Micro Small Medium Enterprises. See this question has been framed based on this news article. Know that there are approximately around 60 million MSMEs in India. They account for 45% of the manufacturing output over 40% of the exports. And they contribute to over 28% of India's GDP as mentioned in this news article. But if you see only 11% out of this approximately 60 million MSMEs have access to capital. That is credit from organized lenders. So, we can see that there is an under penetration in the credit flow. And this situation has further worsened due to the current COVID-19 pandemic. So, to improve the credit access, this news article mentions about an initiative which is called as the open credit enablement network. It is basically a credit protocol infrastructure which has been developed by a think tank called as Indian Software Products Industry Roundtable. So, this portal will actually mediate the interactions between those who provide the money and those who receive the money. Here those who receive the money are mostly the MSMEs and those who provide the money are the loan service providers, which are the main financial lenders and then the other financial companies that provide loan. As per the think tank which has developed this platform, even the private equity venture capital players, angel investors, high net worth individuals can also be a part of this lending exercise as investors. So, initially this program is working with the major lenders who are the banks like State Bank of India, HDFC, etc. And as per some other sources, this lending platform is also backed by the Reserve Bank of India. So, know that this open credit enablement network OSEN is related to MSMEs. So, the correct answer here is option C MSMEs. Let us move on to the practice questions discussion session. Look at this question. Brute rights is often in use due to the refugee crisis. This is a direct question. The correct answer here is option C Tripura. Now look at this question on non-aligned movement. It is a three statement question and you need to choose those statement or statements which are correct. Look at the first statement. It tells that this movement has over 100 member states. Yes, this statement is correct. See, this non-aligned movement recognizes three categories for participation as per the Ministry of External Affairs, full membership, observer status and guest status. So, as of now, NAM has 120 member states, 17 observer countries and 10 observer organizations. And India is one of the 120 members. From this, you can tell that the first statement is correct and the third statement is incorrect. Now look at the second statement. It tells that the secretariat of NAM is in Bandung of Indonesia. During our discussion, we saw that there is no concept called secretariat in NAM. So, the second statement is incorrect. Hence, the correct answer here is option A one only since only the first statement is correct. Look at this question on 10th schedule of Indian constitution. It is a two statement question and you need to choose those statement or statements which are correct. Look at the first statement. It tells that 10 schedule deals only with the disqualification on the grounds of defection. Yes, this statement is correct. Look at the second statement. It tells that on any question regarding disqualification of members under the schedule, the decision of the Prime Minister shall be final. This statement is incorrect because if you remember, we saw about 10 schedule in the context of Rajasthan State Legislative Assembly. If you go by that logic, you can tell that Prime Minister is not the correct option here. As per Paras 6, 1 of 10th schedule, the decision of the chairman or the speaker is final. So, it is the speaker or the chairman of the respective houses who takes a decision regarding disqualification of members under the 10th schedule, not the Prime Minister. So, here the correct answer is option A one only. With this, we come to the end of the analysis of all the news articles taken up for today's discussion and also the practice questions discussion session. If you like the video, press the like button, comment and share and do subscribe to Shankar IAS Academy YouTube channel for latest videos and updates. Stay focused and motivated friends. Thank you.