 Welcome to the Hindi News Analysis by Shankar Ayes Academy. The list of topics chosen for today's discussion along with the page numbers is given here for your reference. See this news article from today's editorial page. This article focuses on the plight of prisoners in the COVID-19 pandemic. So this article is authored by a former administrator, diplomat and the former governor of West Bengal. So the author examines the situations of prisoners and urges the use of an important amendment to the CRPC. That is Code of Criminal Procedure. Let us see these aspects now before going further. The relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See in the last say 6 to 8 months, we have discussed the pandemic's impact on many sectors. Say we have discussed healthcare workers, we have discussed impact on women, children, migrants, rural labor, etc. But rarely we ever think about those who are confined in prisons that too in a congested manner in this social distancing era. First to discuss the prisoners situation in this pandemic, do we have the needed statistics? According to author, statistics exist but they are not available in a public domain. So as a public, we cannot have access to them. So what about other countries? So to explain the situation, author takes examples of U.S.U.K. For example, in America, the criminal justice activists warned about the spread of disease among prisoners as back as in March 2020 itself. That is even before COVID became a very big pandemic, the activists of America warned the government about the spread of virus in the prisons. These activists or public health experts signed a letter which called the federal prisons and immigration detention centers as breeding grounds for uncontrolled transmission of the virus. So this speculation became true when by September 2020, in USA, 44 of 50 COVID-19 clusters were found in prisons. And even in UK, a mass testing program was started for all prisoners in many prisons in July itself. So in US as well as in UK, either the civil society demanded for pandemic control in prisons or the government did it itself based on public opinion. Now, if we talk about India, the main issue according to author is that search statistics are not even demanded by the public or civil society. One of the reasons for this is poor tradition of human rights activism in India. Second issue is that the government is also not doing much. So what is the condition of prisons in India? Before know that, prisons and persons detained therein is in state list according to 7th schedule. Additionally, prisons are exclusive responsibility of state governments under the prison act of 1894. So simply put, states have more responsibility in managing the prisons and the prisoners. So to know about the prison's condition, we have something called prison statistics India 2019 report. This report is an annual statistical report released by National Crime Records Bureau. So this report provides statistics on number of prisons, prisoners as well as prison infrastructure. And according to last report that is 2019 report, the occupancy rate has increased. And as you can see here, the all India average occupancy rate is always more than 100%. So what does we mean by more than 100%? If the capacity is 100, more than 100 prisoners are being put in the prisons. Unfortunately, some states have crossed 140% occupancy rate. So this clearly means that prisons in India are overcrowded and overburdened. And if we take the type of prisoners, under trial prisoners are more than other types. See, under trial prisoners constitute about 69% of total prisoners. See, the prisoners that is who are staying in prison are categorized as convicts, under trials, didn't use. So what do you mean by convict? Convict is a person found guilty of a crime. So he made a crime, he was found guilty and court gave him punishment. So this person was being kept in jail. Such person is called convict. And under trial is a person who is currently on trial in court of law. And a detainee is any person held lawfully in custody. So here the worst condition is of the under trials. Because as we just saw, they are currently on trial in court of law. So they can be either convicted or also can be acquitted. So they may be found guilty or they may be found innocent. So as per the current law under CRPC, they can be detained up to 90 days depending on the nature of offense. But as we know, in some exceptional circumstances, they are also detained indefinitely. So here we are not saying that enough time should not be given for investigation and trial, during which under trials are imprisoned. But since some of them could be acquitted, the overcrowding along with some other issues make it worse for under trials. Other issues like poor living conditions, inadequate healthcare facilities and even torture by other prisoners. So under trials face huge violation of basic human rights and huge injustice is caused to their families. So our focus here is on under trials since if they are declared innocent and released, they may spread the disease to their families, neighborhood, if not properly taken care of. So in this regard, other has given certain certions to safeguard prisoners, especially under trials and to curb the spread of disease. So here we are linking two aspects, one COVID-19, second one, the inmates who are under trial. So first search is conduct an immediate review of all prisoners' vulnerability to the virus. The review should comprise 100% testing and repeated testing procedures in all prisons. And among the type of prisoners, review could be started with under trials as they may come in contact with outside world first. After review, those testing positive should be isolated as well as hospitalized. Second search is to vigorously bringing down the population of prisons. Here it does not mean that releasing the prisoners just like that. But others suggest using of an important CRPC amendment which is CRPC Amendment Act of 2005. So this amendment inserted a new section and according to this section, a person during the period of investigation, inquiry, or trial under any law, the under trial prisoner shall be released by court if the under trial has undergone detention for a period extending up to one half of maximum period of imprisonment specified for that offense. See for example, I have committed a crime. The maximum period of imprisonment for the crime I have committed is two years. But for the last one year, I have been in jail. So I have already completed half of the maximum imprisonment. I may get if I am proved guilty. So persons like me who are under trial and completed half of the maximum punishment even before finding guilty can be released by the court on his personal bond with or without sureties. This section is not applicable to an offense for which punishment is death penalty. That means if this section is used properly, it will not only be fair to under trials but it will also reduce the burden on prisons as under trials constitute major type of prisoners. Around 69% of prisoners are under trial. So this will lead to decongestion of prisons and will be very helpful in containing the COVID-19. So author suggests to bring this action into force on an urgent nationwide basis. Next suggestion is that when they are to be released, they can be vaccinated on a priority basis. Next, central government should also push for above certions since preventing infectious and contagious diseases is a subject under concurrent list. Meaning both state and center should work for it. So this is all about the discussion of this news article. We had a very interesting discussion linking a gray area that is prisoners issues with that of COVID-19. Let us move on to next news article discussion. Let us see these three news articles. One is editorial, one is open and other is data point. All these three articles are with reference to COVID-19 vaccination drive in India. See recently the government has launched the vaccination drive for COVID-19 that is coronavirus. However, the vaccination drive was not greeted with much enthusiasm as can be seen with many number of people are not coming for getting vaccine. Even in a state like Tamil Nadu with well-developed health infrastructure only 16% coverage was achieved on the first day. So this was a result of poor communication lack of transparency from the side of government. And in turn this has resulted in vaccine hesitancy among the people and to the worst vaccine hesitancy was noted even among healthcare workers. So now let us see what vaccine hesitancy is and what are the factors that are leading to predominance of vaccine hesitancy in the society. See according to WHO vaccine hesitancy is defined as reluctance or refusal to vaccine despite the availability of vaccines. Even though vaccines are available people are not coming to get the vaccine. So what is leading to vaccine hesitancy among general population? See in case of COVID-19 the hesitancy is due to the fact that the government has given emergency use authorization for two vaccines one is COVID shield and other is co-vaccine without proper efficacy data. And with respect to co-vaccine of Bharat biotech the emergency use authorization in clinical trial mode was given and there are even questions related to efficacy of these vaccines which were conducted in phase 3 were not addressed properly by the government. So all these factors along with the speed with which government has started the vaccination drive has led to little suspicion in the general population. So this led to vaccine hesitancy in the country. So what are the other factors which are leading to vaccine hesitancy? First one rise of anti-vaccine movements in the west. Second fear of risk associated with the vaccines. Generally vaccine involves administrating a live weekend or killed virus into the body so that our immune system will start producing antibodies against this weak virus and this antibodies will prevent the future infection of the virus. So but sometimes this weak virus may also lead to health problems and reactions. So fear of vaccine risk is also leading to hesitancy of the vaccine. And third one the most important one religious suspicions and rumors. For many years a minority community in India is always worried that Indian government is administering contraceptive vaccine that is family planning vaccine to minorities in India. Because of this reason many minorities are not taking the vaccines. Further lack of well-developed public health system along with using coercion that is forced to vaccinate the population is also leading to vaccine hesitancy. So these are the other factors which needs to be addressed. So in this light the former director of IISC Bangalow says that it is not prudent or it is not wise to doubt the Indian vaccines. He further said that we will have to wait for another six months to see the real efficacy of the vaccines. In addition the virus in India is mutating and also weakening on its own. So unless large population is vaccinated we cannot really talk about the efficacy of the vaccine at the moment. So there is also a phenomenon called antibody dependent enhancement which means once the vaccine is injected the virus specific antibodies which were produced by the immune system will enhance the severity of the virus. So contrastingly the vaccines sometimes may even lead to increased severity of virus. What experts in India assured that this will not happen with regard to vaccines which are being administered in India that are Covishield and Covaxin. The author further added that we have to believe in these vaccines because the current pandemic has posed a great challenge to the world and historically only vaccines saved human lives from deadly viruses. If you see Indian government under Mission Indra Dhanush intensified Mission Indra Dhanush is administering vaccines for many diseases for free of cost. This is mainly to save lives of infants and children. So author says that vaccination of large population is very important for protection against fresh infections as well as second wave and even there are many doubts regarding expert committee advising the drugs controller general of India. Many people argued or criticized that DGCA has been pressurized to give emergency use authorization for vaccines but it is to be noted that DCGI is not just an individual to be pressurized. It is an institution and whatever the decisions will be made only after following the due process. So author concludes that doubting the vaccine will only disrupt the government's efforts to vaccinate. We have a very huge population to be vaccinated. So we need to remove suspicions with regard to vaccine and also move ahead. So in this context building confidence in the process is very crucial to achieve the mass vaccination and our prime ministers often repeated mantra that is Sabka Vikas and Sabka Vishwas that is for everyone's development with everyone's trust is very relevant here and health ministry must do whatever it takes to make a success of the vaccination drive. So this is all what editorial and OPD says and if we come to the data point which gives data regarding COVID-19 vaccines their pricing and how much India needs to spend to achieve mass vaccination is given in the data point. First it is to be noted that the two vaccines Covaxin and Covishield which were rolled out in India are of low cost compared to other countries. But the problem here is even to vaccinate 50% of Indian population using the cheapest vaccine available it would require an allocation of more than 40% of India's current health budget. As you can see in this picture for vaccinating 50% we need 42% of health budget for 70% we may need 58% of health budget. So this is two times the share of all vaccination allocations in the current health budget. So more resources need to be spent out for achieving the vaccine targets. And coming to cost of various vaccines which are available in the market the Indian made vaccines that are Bharat biotechs Covaxin and serum institutes Covishield are comparatively cheaper. The government is procuring vaccines at just around rupees 200 per each dose. But the problem here is the COVID vaccine at rupees 200 is slightly more expensive than other vaccines. So the common public will find it difficult to buy the vaccine and get it administered even if government gives authorization for private sale of vaccines. So this is what data point says. So this is all about the discussion of these three news articles editorial op-ed and data point. We had a brief discussion on lack of enthusiasm in getting vaccination second the reasons for increased vaccine hesitancy and what is the data regarding cost of vaccines and how much India needs to spend to vaccinate 50% of Indian population. Let us move on to next news article discussion. Let us take up this news article from today's editorial page which talks about unsustainable mining. Say we know that minerals are valuable natural resources being finite and non-renewable which means their quantity is restricted and cannot be renewable means they cannot be used again and again. So they constitute the vital raw materials for many basic industries and are a major resource for development. For example, Japan after hit by nuclear bombs in World War II needed lot of I know to rebuild entire country. Then India exported a lot of I know to Japan which helped Japan in reconstructing the country after the World War. So minerals are a major source of development. Further mining is a very important economic activity in India and contributes nearly 3% of India's GDP and just as you said India is one of the largest exporters of I know chromite bauxite mica zinc manganese and is ranked fifth among mineral producing countries in terms of volume of production. And as you can see in this picture in terms of coal steel we are third in terms of iron ore we are fourth bauxite fifth zinc sixth and around 98 types of minerals are being produced in our country or extracted in our country. So in this regard author talks about unsustainable mining practices which do not take consideration of future generations. So in this context let us discuss the legislations in India regarding mining and also the opinion of the author on mining practices before going further the relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See in India the management of mineral resources is the responsibility of both central and state governments. So the state governments are the owners of minerals located within the boundaries of the state concern. Also the state governments have the power to frame policies regulate the exploration extraction and processing of all minor minerals such as building stones clay sand etc. So minor minerals responsibility is completely vested with the state government and the central government is the owner of minerals underlying the ocean within the territorial waters or exclusive economic zone of India. This is in accordance with article 297 of Indian constitution and with respect to major minerals central government has the power of revision fixing of royalty issuing regulations etc. So in this regard Parliament has passed a legislation the Mines and Minerals Act of 1957 that is MMDR. This MMDR act regulates the overall mining sector in India and this act was recently amended in the last year that is 2020. So today's article mainly talks about a term called mineral concession. So what do we mean by mineral concession? See a concession means a grant of right by the government. In this context a mineral concession means an area allocated by the government to the private individuals for the extraction of minerals. So who has the right to grant mineral concessions? See the state governments grant the mineral concessions for all the minerals located within the boundary of the state under the provisions of MMDR act as well as mineral concession rules of 1960. But in many cases prior approval of central government is required. Next author talks about the current mineral policy and what are the issues with that? See we all know that economic reforms were initiated in India in 1991 that is liberalization, privatization and globalization. So in pursuance of these reforms national mineral policy was announced in 1993 and subsequently it was modified in 2008 and the latest version is national mineral policy of 2019. So broadly the aim of this policy is to have a more effective, meaningful and implementable policy which brings in further transparency, better regulation and enforcement, balanced social and economic growth and sustainable mining practices. Have a brief idea on all these words you can use them in the main six. So coming to highlights of this new policy first in areas of regulation procedures for grant of mineral concessions will be made more transparent. This is in order to improve ease of doing business. Further more emphasis will be given on e-governance, satellite and remote sensing applications. Second in case of prospecting and exploration state of our technologies like 2D, 3D systems will be used and to ensure maximum exploration and extraction in exclusive economic zone the cooperation between Geological Survey of India and the Ministry of Earth Sciences is envisaged. Next in case of infra development dedicated mineral corridors will be developed to transport mineral from mining areas. For this coastal waterways and inland waterways will be effectively used and very importantly the policy highlights the importance of promoting zero waste mining and as usual the measures will be taken to attract foreign investments in the mining sector. So these are the basic information regarding mining policies in the country. We have talked about MMDR Act we have talked about National Mining Policy of 2019. So now what author is trying to say in this aspect first author points that unsustainable mining practices are leading to depletion of natural resources which also include minerals. Additionally the real value of those minerals are not realized when they are extracted and sold. So this means governments are selling minerals at significantly lower prices than what they are worth. This is mainly driven by lobbying political donations and even corruption. To substantiate this author takes the example from the annual reports of Vedanta Vedanta is a big corporate involved in mining and other industrial development. So according to the report Gova lost more than 95% of the value of its minerals after extraction costs and a reasonable profit for the extractor. So this loss to the government is being encased by few extractors and chronic capitalists. So this is leading to inequality again. So because of these the future value of those minerals is not considered. So the future generations are deprived of the resources due to our unsustainable usage. For example as we just said Gova the people and future generations of Gova have sold mineral wealth of rupees 100 for just 5 rupees thereby losing around 95 rupees. See the current national mineral policy that is 2019 policy states that natural resources including minerals are a shared inheritance where state is the trustee on behalf of people to ensure that future generations receive the benefit of inheritance. It means we are inheriting the natural resources from our previous generations. So similar to that we have to give the resources to our next generations as well. So according to the policy state will act as a trustee to ensure that future generations are not left out with minerals. So author suggests that we should change our paradigm to understand minerals as a shared inheritance and not a source of windfall revenue which means government should not see minerals as a milking cow of revenues. So in this regard the author talks about the principle of intergenerational equity or we often hear this sustainable development. So this would make very important for us to ensure that future generations inherit at least as much as we did. So author suggests that we should extract and sell our mineral wealth with zero loss in value. That means state as trustee must capture the full economic rent. And in this regard a future generations fund should be created and the money received from the sale of minerals should be deposited in it so that the value of minerals which we exploit now can be enjoyed by our future generations too. So this is all about the discussion of this news article wherein we have talked about unsustainable mining practices. We had a very detailed understanding on mining policies in our country. Let us move on to next news article discussion. See this news article talks about the report relating to marriage age of women. In the last year's budget speech the union finance minister proposed a panel on the age of girl entering motherhood. This is to lower maternal mortality rates and improve nutrition levels. So in short government wanted to examine whether increasing the age of marriage of women is necessary. For this purpose government of India has set up a task force in the last June with these terms of reference. Just have a brief look over it. For example the first one to examine the correlation of age of marriage and motherhood with health, medical well-being, nutritional status, IMR, MMR, TFR, sex ratio at birth, CSR, etc. So the correlation should be examined. Second, measures for promoting higher education suitable legislative instruments in existing laws to support the recommendations to work out a detailed rollout plan with timelines to implement the recommendations. So these are the important terms of reference given to the task force panel. And today's news article says that the report has been submitted to the government now but the details of the report are not yet available in the public domain. Now the major outcome of this report could be raising the minimum age of marriage for women from 18 years to 21 years. See, before 1978 women's age of marriage was 15 years according to Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929. This is popularly known as Sardar Act. You would have studied this act in your history books. But in 1978 this act was amended to increase the age to 18 years. And then when the prohibition of Child Marriage Act came into force it repealed the Sardar Act. So the 2006 act provides for legal age of marriage for both men and women by defining the term child. So according to the act child means a boy who has not completed 21 years of age or a girl who has not completed 18 years of age. So simply put boy can marry only after 21 girl can marry only after 18. Now the government is aiming to increase it to 20 years. Thus bringing women's marriage age and power with men. But implementing minimum age for marriage has remained a challenge since various courts continued to uphold the customary practices and personal laws of different religious communities which govern family matters. Only the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 changed with time to bring the age criteria in consonance with prohibition of Child Marriage Act. So the main problem here is many of you might know in most of our villages child marriage is very common that is a girl will be married immediately after she reaches puberty or once she completes 10th grade she will be married. So because of all these religious or cultural issues there has been some legal challenges in enforcing the minimum marriage age for women. So this is the legal scenario. So what are the advantages of increasing the marriage age of women to 21? First one it may lead to positive economic social and health effect for families women, children and the society at large. If minimum age is increased to 21 more women can pursue education and as they may get pregnancy at the later ages the health of both infants that is IMR as well as mothers that is MMR could be improved and according to some studies the risk of IMR as well as anemia for first births will decline after the age 21. There are also arguments against the increasing of marriage age. First it is opposed stating that this move may be used to imprison young adults who go against social norms and have consensual sexual relationships or marrying without parents consent. So as women cannot be married until they attain 21 years they will be forced or imprisoned in their own homes and they may not be allowed outside. Second it is also feared that without addressing other important aspects this move could actually increase the number of child marriages and can increase gender bias. For example if parents were expected to support their daughters for longer periods that is up to 21 years because of poverty they may marry them off in secret or with forged documents leading to child marriages. This in turn may lead to increase in unsafe abortions as well. If you see in some cultures in almost all religions in India women are seen as a burden and marrying women at the younger ages is seen as a respite to the parents. So increasing of marriage age of women to 21 years may further enhance this gender bias or may lead to increased abortions which further deteriorate the sex ratios in our country. So before bringing such changes government should look into all aspects say religion, culture, economic burden or even educational burden everything. So all these issues should be addressed before bringing any policy change. So what do you think about increasing the marriage age of women? What's your opinion? Should it be increased or should it be maintained as it is? Give your opinion in the comment section. Let us move on to practice questions discussion session. See this question. This question is framed based on these two news articles which talk about Tunisia and Uganda. See a social unrest has been erupted in working class districts of several cities in Tunisia. The unrest is mainly due to an economic crisis which was worsened by the pandemic. This sparked rapid inflation and high youth unemployment and coming to Uganda's news article it talks about the controversy related to the recent president elections in Uganda. The main opposition challenger had rejected the official election results as fraudulent but according to official reports the long-time leader Yoveri Musevini had won the elections which is not being accepted by the opposition leader who is Bobby Wein. So coming back to the question which is framed based on Tunisia and Uganda three statements are given here and we are supposed to identify incorrect statements. Statement 1 Tunisia lies north of the equator while Uganda lies south of the equator. As you can see in this map Tunisia lies north of the equator but Uganda lies along the equator and not south of the equator. So statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 Both Tunisia and Uganda share border with Lake Victoria. This statement is also incorrect because as you can see here only Uganda shares border with Lake Victoria. And Tunisia lies in northern part of Africa. Tunisia shares border with Algeria, Libya and to the north and northeast it is bordered by Mediterranean Sea. So statement 2 is also incorrect. Statement 3 River Vadi Mazarda flows through Tunisia. Yes this statement is correct. This is the main river of Tunisia and the country's only perennial flowing stream. This river lies in north-eastern Algeria in the Mazarda mountains and flows northeast to the Gulf of Tunisia before entering the Mediterranean Sea. So statement 3 is correct. So it should not be in the answer. So correct answer is option A one and two only. See this question. Consider the following statements with reference to prohibition of Child Marriage Act of 2006. Three statements are given here and we are supposed to identify incorrect statements. Statement 1 The definition of child varies for female and male child. Yes, statement 1 is correct because for females it is 18 years and for males it is 21 years. Coming to statement 2 It repealed Sardha Act. Yes, statement 2 is also correct. PCMA Act repealed the Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929 which is famously known as Sardha Act. So statement 1 and 2 are correct so they should not be in the answer. So you can strike off option A, option C as well as option D. So therefore correct answer is option B three only. So the statement 3 which is it prescribes punishment for both male and female adults marrying a child. This statement is incorrect because only male adults marrying a child are punished under the PCMA Act of 2006 because this is what is common and we don't generally see an adult female marrying a child. So statement 3 is incorrect therefore the correct answer is option B three only. Let us now take main practice questions. See this question. Natural resources including minerals or a shared inheritance where the state is the trustee on behalf of the people to ensure that future generations receive the benefit of inheritance. Elaborate. Next, see this question. What is vaccine hesitancy? What are the reasons for increased vaccine hesitancy and suggest measures to overcome it? See this main question from GS2. Presents are breeding grounds for uncontrolled transmission of virus. What solutions do you suggest to curb this growing minis? Write your answers for these questions and post your answers in the comment section. With this we conclude today's news analysis. If you find this session resourceful click on the like button show your appreciation in the comment section and don't forget to subscribe to our YouTube channel.