 Good evening aspirants. Welcome to the Hindi news analysis by Shankara Ace Academy. The list of articles which has been chosen for today's analysis are provided here. The link for the handwritten notes in the PDF format and the time stamping for the displayed articles is given in the description box below. And for the benefit of smartphone users, the time stamping is also provided in the comments section. Let's move on to our first article analysis. This discussion is based on the corruption perceptions index which was yesterday released by the transparency international. Now this discussion is very important because already in 2016 GS2 main paper we had a question based on this corruption perceptions index. The question is in the integrity index of transparency international, India stands very low. Discuss briefly the legal, political, social and cultural factors that have caused the decline of public morality in India. So this topic is very important from the examination point of view. And in this context we will be discussing in brief about corruption and about this index of 2019 and its findings globally and also with respect to India. The syllabus that can be linked to this discussion is given here for your reference. First let us see what do we mean by corruption? Generally if we say corruption is the abuse of interested power for private gain. And according to transparency international corruption can be classified as grand corruption, petty corruption and political corruption. And this classification is based on the amounts of money that is lost and the sector where it occurs. So in this grand corruption consists of the acts which are committed at a high level of government and this corruption distort policies or the central functioning of the state. And it enables leaders to benefit at the expense of the public good. The next type of corruption is the petty corruption. It refers to the everyday abuse of interested power by low level public officials and by mid level public officials in their interactions with ordinary citizens. And these ordinary citizens who often are trying to access basic goods or services in places like hospitals, schools, police departments and other agencies. And they encounter this kind of corruption. So this amounts to petty corruption. The next type of corruption is political corruption. It is a manipulation of policies, institutions and rules of procedures in the allocation of resources and financing. And this corruption is carried out by political decision makers who abuse their position to sustain their power, status and wealth. Now corruption is an important social issue because it impacts societies in a multitude of ways. Sometimes it also costs lives and generally it costs people their freedom, their health and their money. That is why it becomes important to tackle corruption and also to know about the level of corruption that is existing in the current world. And this is provided by the Corruption Perceptions Index. And this index is released annually by the Transparency International. It is an international non-governmental organization which is based in Berlin, Germany. And the vision of Transparency International is very simple which is a world free of corruption. So in order to achieve this world free of corruption, Transparency International works together with governments, businesses and citizens to stop the abuse of power, to stop bribery and to stop secret deals. So in this way, this year Transparency International has released the Corruption Perceptions Index of 2019. Now this index ranks 180 countries and territories by their perceived levels of public sector corruption according to experts and business people. And the CPI uses a scale of 0 to 100 where 0 is highly corrupt and 100 is very clean. So every country is assigned a score from 0 to 100. So what are the key findings of this 2019 index? The first finding is the average score for these 180 countries and territories and the average score is just 43. Then another finding is that more than two thirds of countries have scored below 50 in this CPI 2019 which means that in more than 120 countries corruption is high. So are there any top performers in 2019 who have performed well with respect to this index? Yes, the top performers are Denmark and New Zealand and they have a score of 87 each. So you can see that still no country has got a score of 100 which means there is no corruption. And there are also bottom performers who have scored less than 15. These bottom performers are Somalia and South Sudan and Somalia has just scored 9 and South Sudan has just scored 12. So this Corruption Perception Index of 2019 reveals that a majority of countries are showing little improvement or no improvement in tackling corruption. It also shows that corruption is more pervasive in countries where money flows freely into electoral campaigns and where governments listen only to the voices of wealthy or influential individuals. So it simply means governments are being undemocratic. Now this can be related with the Democracy Index of 2019 which we discussed yesterday. Yesterday we saw that democracy is taking a retreat globally. And as a result we are witnessing more and more popular movements or agitations and revolts across the world. Now this is clear as last year we have witnessed millions of people joining hands together to speak out against corruption in their governments. And all over the world anti-corruption movements gained momentum last year. And we have also heard news about street protests against corruption in Chile, Zeg Republic and Lebanon. So the findings of this CPI Index reiterates people's frustration against their governments. So this is the global reality. Now what is the condition of India with respect to this? According to this 2019 CPI Index, India is ranked at 80th position out of 180 countries. And India has secured a score of 41 out of 100. So India has scored less than the global average score of 43. If you see the last year CPI Index that is CPI 2018, India was placed at 78th position out of 180 countries. But India's score was same which was 41. So we can see that India has remained same in tackling corruption. Based on this score we can say that we have not taken any additional measure to tackle corruption. Even though we are having the same score, India has dropped to the 80th position because some countries have improved their performance with respect to tackling corruption. So this is the condition of India. Now what about our neighborhood? If you see this table, we have given the ranks and score of the neighborhood countries in which the best performer is Bhutan which has ranked at 25th position and it has scored 68. And if you see China's score is also 41 and it is also ranked at the same position which is 80th. And the least performer is Pakistan which has ranked at 120th and it has scored 32 only. So this is the corruption scenario in our neighborhood. Now this index raises a specific criticism against democracies like India and Australia. The index mentions that in these countries several factors have resulted in stagnation or a decline in the control of corruption. And some of these factors are unfair and opaque political financing. There is no transparency in political financing. Then undue influence in decision making. And then another factor is lobbying by powerful corporate interest groups. Here lobbying means influencing or persuading the officials for their own benefit. Now this criticism by the index can be related with the criticisms that are raised by several groups against the electoral bonds in India. Because according to the critics, electoral bonds ultimately benefits the ruling party only. So in this regard the index also notes that citizens across the world are fed up with corrupt leaders and corrupt institutions. And according to this index corruption is so pervasive that it exists at every level. That is there is corruption that occurs at the highest levels of government to the petty bribery that blocks access to basic public services like healthcare and education to the people. So if this is not addressed, then it will create frustration among the people and it will eventually result in a lack of trust in government among the people. And it will further erode the public confidence in the political leaders, elected officials and they will lose confidence in democracy also. So it will make the entire system unstable. That is why it is important to tackle the social evil of corruption. And for this purpose, Transparency International provides two dimensions to end corruption, restore trust in politics. First dimension is to prevent opportunities for political corruption. And the second dimension is to foster the integrity of political systems. And even in this CPA 2019, the Transparency International has made several recommendations for tackling public corruption. And these recommendations are very important from the main examination point of view. The second recommendation is managing conflicts of interests and regulate lobbying activities. It means that the government should ensure that its policymaking is transparent and it is not under any undue influence. So to ensure that while making the important decisions, government should consult a wider range of groups and it should not restrict to few private interests. Then the second recommendation is control political financing. It means that political parties should disclose their sources of income and assets and governments should empower oversight agencies with stronger mandates and appropriate resources. This would help to prevent excessive money and influence in politics. Then the next recommendation is strengthen electoral integrity. This means that governments should ensure that elections are free and fair and it can be done by preventing buying of votes for cash and by preventing misinformation campaigns. As both of these are important and they are essential to rebuild trust in the government. And this will also enable citizens to use their vote to punish corrupt politicians. Then the next recommendation is to tackle preferential treatments. In this, the governments should ensure that service delivery and public resource allocation are not driven by personal connections. And they should ensure that they are not biased towards special interest groups at the expense of the overall public code. Then the next recommendation is empower citizens. So governments should protect civil liberties and political rights including they should protect the freedom of speech, expression and association. And governments should engage civil society and protect citizens, activists, whistleblowers and journalists who are monitoring and exposing corruption. Then the last recommendation is reinforce checks and balances. That is governments must promote the separation of powers. It should strengthen judicial independence and it should preserve checks and balances. So that is all about this news article. In this discussion we discussed about the concept of corruption. We discussed about corruption perception index of 2019 and also the recommendations given by transparency international to tackle corruption. With this we come to the end of this news article discussion. The split practice question will be discussed in the last session. Moving on to the next discussion. This discussion is based on the area international relations. And the news article talks about the Sagar Mata dialogue. And the official name of this dialogue is Sagar Mata sambhad. And sambhad means nothing but dialogue. So in this context we will be seeing about this Sagar Mata sambhad in brief. The syllabus that can be linked to this discussion is given here for your reference. Now the news article mentions that Nepal has invited the prime ministers of India and Pakistan along with several other heads of governments and states. For the upcoming Sagar Mata dialogue. And according to this news article this would be the biggest diplomatic dialogue in Nepal's recent history. And this dialogue is expected to be attended by many global leaders. Apart from the leaders of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation countries. Which is nothing but the SARG countries. So in this context of this news article let us see about this Sagar Mata sambhad. Now this Sagar Mata sambhad or Sagar Mata dialogue is a multi-stakeholder dialogue forum. And this forum is committed to deliberate on the most prominent issues of global, regional and national significance. So normally if you see a dialogue is named after the place where it is held. And in this context this dialogue is named as Sagar Mata dialogue. After the world's tallest mountain which is Mount Everest. Because Mount Everest is also known as Sagar Mata. And Mount Everest is also a symbol of friendship and is meant to promote the notions of common good. And collective well-being of humanity. So in this way the dialogue is based on the saying that knowledge is generated through discourses. It means the most challenging issues faced by the global humanity can be addressed through discourses and debates. Now this Sagar Mata sambhad was established in 2019. And it was established as a permanent global forum. And this forum will be headquartered in Kathmandu. And it is a joint collaborative initiative of Nepal's Ministry of Institute of Foreign Affairs. And the Policy Research Institute. And as we saw already this dialogue is structured as a multi-stakeholder dialogue. And it is also a cross-sectoral discussion forum. It aims to bring global leaders such as the heads of the state or heads of the government. Parliamentarians, policy makers and the heads of local governments. So in this way the sambhad will also be a platform for leaders from the intergovernmental organizations, private sector, civil society, think tanks, academia, women, youths and media. And this dialogue is expected to take place every two years. And it will provide a platform for the mentioned stakeholders for discussing ways of cooperation. For discussing exchange of ideas and sharing of experiences on prominent global issues. And the first edition of this Sagar Mata sambhad will be held in Kathmandu. And it will be held from 2nd to 4th April of 2020. And the theme of this year's dialogue is climate change, mountains and the future of the humanity. Now since this dialogue is a multi-stakeholder dialogue and it involves heads from different states and governments. This dialogue could also become a platform for bilateral interaction among leaders. Now this dialogue is important for India because both Indian and Pakistani prime ministers are invited for the event. So this dialogue might help to bring down the hostility between the two countries which is currently at an all-time high. In addition to this we also know that the Shanghai Cooperation Organization's 2020 summit will be held in India. And as a part of this India has invited all heads of governments of SCO member countries including Pakistan. In addition to the Sagar Mata sambhad provides another opportunity for the bilateral talk between India and Pakistan. So we will know more about this Sagar Mata sambhad when it happens in April 2020. With this we come to the end of this discussion. The displayed practice question will be discussed in the last session. This discussion is based on death penalty. And in this discussion we will be discussing two news articles in which one news article is about the remarks made by the Chief Justice of India about the death penalty. And the news article also talks about the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in 2014 in connection with the safeguarding the interest of the death row convicts. And the second news article is an editorial which is also about the recent initiative of the Centre which has requested the Supreme Court to modify the 2014 guidelines. So in this analysis we will see the observations made by the CJI. We will see about the 2014 Supreme Court guidelines in detail and we will also see the opinions mentioned in the editorial. And this discussion is very important from the examination point of view. And it is important under GS paper 2 because in 2014 there was a question with respect to the role of President with respect to mercy petitions. The question is instances of President's delay in commuting death sentences has come under public debate as denial of justice. Should there be a time specified for this President to accept or reject such petitions? Now as this year also the issue of death penalty is going on so we can expect a question on death penalty this year. So that is why this discussion is very important from examination point of view. Now let us move into the discussion. Before that the syllabus that is relevant to this discussion is given here for your reference. Now see in 2014 the Supreme Court has commuted the death sentences of 15 death convicts while hearing a set of writ petitions. When we say commute or commutation it denotes the substitution of one form of punishment for a lighter form. For example a death sentence may be commuted to rigorous imprisonment and then which in turn may be commuted to a simple imprisonment. So in 2014 the death sentences of 15 death convicts were commuted by Supreme Court. In this the main ground of commutation of death sentence for the 13 cases of death convicts was the delay in deciding the mercy petitions. And in the remaining two cases the ground of commutation of death sentence is the mental illness of the convicts. And this case law is titled as Shatrugan Chauhan and another versus Union of India and others. And in the judgment related to the mentioned writ petitions the apex court primarily held that an unexplained delay in carrying out an execution could lead to commutation of death penalty to life imprisonment. In the same judgment the court has issued guidelines to safeguard the interest of death row convicts. So today's news is that the central government has filed an application at the Supreme Court to modify some parts of the guidelines given in 2004. In the case law titled as Shatrugan Chauhan and another versus Union of India and others. So in the backdrop of these events the Chief Justice of India has made some statements on death penalty. And the remarks of the CJI and the discussion on death penalty were part of hearing of review petitions which were filed by two persons who were convicted of death penalty. And they were sentenced to death for the murder of seven relatives. So now first let us see about the remarks made by the Chief Justice of India on death penalty. The CJI has stated that it was important for the capital punishment to reach its finality. The death penalty cannot be questioned at every turn by the convict. Therefore those who are sentenced to death penalty they cannot fight against death penalty endlessly. The CJI also talked about the role of judges in the court while deciding such matters. And it was not for a judge to forgive a crime. It is because the cardinal duty of a judge was to see if the punishment was proportionate to the crime committed by the criminal. Therefore it is not the judge who deals with a criminal it is the law that deals with a criminal. So these were the statements made by the Chief Justice of India on death penalty. Now let us see the Supreme Court guidelines for safeguarding the interests of death row convicts. First guideline is with respect to the solitary confinement. It states that solitary or single cell confinement prior to rejection of mercy petition by the president is unconstitutional. So the rules in present's manuals of the states should not be interpreted to counter this guideline. And it should not violate article 21 of the constitution. Then the second guideline is about the legal aid or the legal assistance to the death row convicts. Here the legal aid is for preparing appeals against the death penalty or for preparing mercy petitions or for accessing available judicial remedies after the mercy petition has been rejected. Therefore even after rejection of the mercy petition by the president the convict can approach a red coat for commutation of the death sentence. In this the death row convict can also challenge the rejection of the mercy petition and the legal aid should be provided to the convict at all stages. Then the third guideline deals with the procedure in placing the mercy petition before the president. Now the procedure is that once death penalty is awarded the convict will file an appeal at the final court of appeal which is the Supreme Court. Once Supreme Court disposes their appeals they will file mercy petitions to the president under article 72 of Indian constitution. Now once the mercy petition is filed this guideline asks to fix a time limit for the state government to forward all the documents pertaining to a particular case to the home ministry. This time limit is to be on the case to case basis depending upon the materials of the case. In a single stance all the relevant documents of a particular case have to be sent. This should be strictly followed to minimize the delay. Now after getting all the details it is for the ministry of home affairs to send the recommendation or their views to the president and this has to be done within a reasonable and rational time. Even after sending the necessary particulars if there is no response from the office of the president it is the responsibility of the ministry of home affairs to send periodical reminders and it is their responsibility to provide required materials for early decision by the president. So in this context you should remember that the power of president to grant pardons etc. and to suspend, remit or commute sentences in certain cases is under article 72 of Indian constitution. This power of the president is therefore a part of the constitutional scheme and it is not a private act of grace on the part of the president. So in the context of exercise of powers under article 72 the president is not supposed to act on her or his own judgment. So the president is mandated to act in accordance with the aid and advice of the council of ministers in accordance with the article 74 of Indian constitution and the advice of the government is binding on the president. So the next guideline deals with the communication of rejection of mercy petition by the governor. We know that under article 161 a death row convict has a constitutional right to make a mercy petition to the governor of a state. The convict is entitled to be informed of the governor's decision on that mercy petition in writing. In the same way next guideline deals with the communication of rejection of the mercy petition by the president. Now this guideline is to eliminate the secret executions by the government for which the Chinese government is infamously known for. With respect to this guideline the court stated that all states should inform the prisoner and their family members about the rejection of mercy petition by the president. In addition to this supreme court in 2014 found that this information is always communicated orally and it is never communicated in writing to the death row convicts or to their family. So the court held that since the convict has a constitutional right under article 72 to make a mercy petition to the president he is entitled to be informed about the decision on the mercy petition in writing. So based on this the rejection of the mercy petition by the president should also be communicated to the convicts family as well in writing. Next the court mentioned that the death convicts are entitled to receive a copy of the rejection of the mercy petition by the president and the governor. The court stated that this is a matter of right. The obligation to see that the family members of the convict receive the message of communication of rejection of mercy petition in time rests with the superintendent of jail. Then the next aspect deals with minimum 14 days notice for execution. The court found that prison manuals of some states do not provide for any minimum period between the communication of rejection of mercy petition to the prisoner and his family and the scheduled date of execution. And some prison manuals have a minimum period of one day others have a minimum period of 14 days. At this point the court stated that it is necessary to have a minimum period of 14 days between the receipt of the communication of the rejection of the mercy petition and the scheduled date of execution. This minimum period is for two reasons. One is that it allows the prisoner to prepare himself mentally for the execution so that he can make peace with God with his will and he can settle other earthly affairs. This is what is stated by the Supreme Court in the guideline. Then the second reason for the minimum period is that it allows the prisoner to have a last and final meeting with his family members. It allows the prisoner's family members to make arrangements to travel to the prison. They may be located at a distant place from the prison and arrangements can be made by the family to meet the prisoner for the last time if they are informed. The court held that when there is no notice to the prisoner about the scheduled date of execution then it amounts to thwarting the prisoner's right to avail of judicial remedies. The next guideline is with respect to mental health evaluation. The court said that there should be regular mental health evaluation of all death row convicts and appropriate medical care should be given to those in need of such medical care. Then the next part is about the physical and mental health reports. The court noted that all prison manuals of the states give discretion to the prison superintendent to stop an execution. This can be done on two grounds. One is that on the account of physical ill health of the convict and the other ground is because of the mental ill health of the convict. So the prison superintendent should satisfy himself that the prisoner is in a fit physical and mental condition so that he can be executed. And the prison superintendent shall base her or his decision on the medical reports by the government doctors and psychiatrists. This is to be done after the rejection of the mercy petition and after the issuance of the execution warrant. If the superintendent is of the opinion that the prisoner is not fit then he should stop the execution and he should produce the prisoner before the medical board for a comprehensive evaluation. And the report which will be obtained after the comprehensive evaluation shall be forwarded to the state government for further action. Then the next guideline deals with furnishing of documents to the convict. The court observed that most of the death row prisoners are extremely poor and they do not have copies of their court papers, judgments, etc. So the highest court of appeal observed that these documents are must for preparation of appeals, mercy petitions and to access post mercy judicial remedies which are available to the prisoner under article 21 of the constitution. Since the availability of these documents is a necessary prerequisite to the accessing of these rights it is necessary that copies of relevant documents should be furnished to the prisoner and this has to be done within a week of pronouncement of death sentence or within a week of disposal of one legal remedy. So within a week the prison authorities have to assess to the death convict in making mercy petition and petitioning the courts. The next guideline is about the final meeting between prisoner and the family of the prisoner. The court states that this final meeting between the family and the prisoner is intrinsic to the humanity and it is intrinsic to justice and it should be followed by all prison authorities. Therefore the prison authorities are asked to necessarily facilitate and they should allow a final meeting between the prisoner and his family and friends prior to the execution. Then the final guideline is about conducting post-mortem. The court found that none of the states provide for compulsory post-mortem that is to be conducted on death convicts after the execution but there were repeated arguments by the petitioners in supreme court that there is dearth or scarcity of experienced hangmen in the country. In the light of this argument the supreme court made it as an obligation of the government to conduct post-mortem after the execution or death of the convict. So these are the guidelines of the supreme court that deals with safeguarding of interests of death through convicts and many legal experts have agreed with the directions or guidelines of the supreme court in this matter. However the central government has sought the court to modify some of the guidelines and according to today's news article the central government has asked the court to cut short the time which is available for the death through convicts to seek legal remedies and they have also asked the court to modify some other aspects of the guidelines. So this is the information that you should know with respect to the news article. So we just saw that the court has observed that the access to post-mercy judicial remedies is implied under article 21 of Indian Constitution and therefore this access becomes a part of right to life of the convict prisoner. And whatever guidelines we just saw the court did not specify much about the time for filing a review petition at the supreme court and they did not also specify any time for second review petition that is the curative petition. Therefore the central government's request will also include additional guidelines on these matters as well. So keep all these points in mind. Now let us discuss the editorial based on whatever we discussed just now. This editorial is a response article to the request of the center to the supreme court to modify the guidelines dictated by the supreme court. So with respect to this the author comments that the guidelines were undoubtedly aimed at protecting the constitutional rights of prisoners that is protection of rights in the context of a sound body of jurisprudence that maintains that such rights extend the right up to the moment of their execution. Therefore author states that the convicts must be allowed to utilize all possible remedies before the execution and you should note that the author is not against death penalty but the author states that the present guidelines of the supreme court are sound guidelines. Then the author also adds that there is a misconception that is some sections of people and the central government states are wrongly thinking that it is because of these guidelines there is delay in the execution of death convicts after the rejection of mercy petition. But we do know that the time taken to decide the mercy petition by the office of the president or governor is one of the main reasons for the delay in carrying out the execution. If you see the editorial there is a mention of curative petition. We discussed about curative petition on 15 January in the news analysis. That day the news was that the supreme court has rejected the curative petitions of two death convicts. So the author states that there is a room for the convicts to file curative petitions one after another if there are more than one death throw convicts in the same case. What can be done in this matter is that there can be a stipulation on time limit and some other additional guidelines in this matter is required. But the author tells that the supreme court mostly do not delay with respect to curative petitions. Even if there is a delay it will be for few days only. So the final point of author is that it is always rational to carry execution for a prisoner provided that the convict is allowed to use all available legal remedies which also includes post mercy judicial remedies as well. In this regard the author feels that nothing is lost in allowing this remedy. Therefore author states that there is no need to expedite the execution of the death prisoner to a sooner time period than what is mandated by the supreme court. The present criminal justice system actually requires to expedite the time of investigation by the police and the trial at the court. It is because in these areas there are delays. Also now after the sentence of death there is a sound guideline that ensures that there is neither delay in execution. At the same time the guidelines also ensure the safeguarding of interest of the death throw convicts. So the point of the author is everything is all and well in the guidelines and no modification is required to expedite the execution more than what is required by the 2014 guidelines. That is why the editorial is titled as needless impatience. So these are the information that you should know with respect to death penalty. With this we come to the end of analysis of the front page news article and the editorial article. The displayed practice question will be discussed in the last session. Moving on to the next discussion. This news article talks about the hydro meteorological disasters and its impact. So in this context we will see what do we mean by hydro meteorological disasters and we will also see about the report that is mentioned in the news article. The syllabus that can be linked to this discussion is given here for your reference. Now the news article has mentioned that the rising carbon dioxide levels may double the floods and storms and the number of intense hydro meteorological disasters could increase by 5.4 percentage annually for an average country. Now these findings have been mentioned in a report which is titled as impacts of carbon dioxide emissions on global intense hydro meteorological disasters. This report was published in the January issue of climate disaster and development journal. Now the study used climate data from 155 countries with a period across 46 years that is from 1970 to 2016. The study adopted the statistical and econometric approach instead of climate models. The study assessed the socio-economic factors that have contributed to the increase in the frequency of intense flood and storm events using the statistical methods. This research explains the factors that contribute to the global increase in the frequency of intense hydro meteorological disasters. So what do we mean by these hydro meteorological disasters? This hydro meteorological disaster or hazard is a process or phenomenon of atmospheric hydrological or oceanographic nature and it may cause loss of life, it may cause injury or other health impacts and it may also cause property damage and loss of services. It will cause social and economic disruption and it will cause environmental damage because it includes tropical cyclones, thunderstorms etc. So the examples for hydro meteorological disasters are floods, coastal storms, El Nino, Indian Ocean Dipole, avalanches, tornadoes, blizzards etc. So what are the reasons for the intense and frequent hydro meteorological disasters? As per the study, in addition to these socio-economic factors, the continuous increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration during the past four decades is significantly correlated with the increase in the number of extreme flood and storm events. In simple words, we can say that increase in carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere has led to the increase in number of extreme flood and storm events. And as per this report, the number of climate disasters could double in less than 21 years and further the risk of extreme floods or storms could double every 13 years at the present rate of carbon dioxide emissions. The report is also predicting that the number of intense hydro meteorological disasters could increase by 5.4% annually for an average country. So what is an average country? Average country is the one which experiences nearly one extreme disaster on an average annually. See the extreme disaster is defined as the one that causes 100 or more fatalities or it affects 1000 or more people or both. And according to this report, India faces about 5 to 10 times as many extreme events as that of the average country. And the report also highlights that if there is one more extreme event in India like the Kerala floods of 2018 that killed at least 400 people, then it will damage the ability of our country to withstand such extreme event. Now based on the estimation of this report, which is that the risk of extreme floods or storms could double every 13 years, then these doubling of number of extreme floods in the 13 years would be catastrophic for India. It is because these disasters may severely damage the environment, it will damage the socio-economic progress and it will damage the welfare of millions of people in our country and also worldwide. And the estimates in this study further suggest that if current trends in environmental degradation and carbon dioxide accumulation remains unchecked, then the frequency of intense hydro meteorological disasters would increase. Therefore, the report calls for a strong and urgent case for the implementation of climate change mitigation and adaptation measures. And one of such measure we saw yesterday which is the state action plans on climate change. So, that is all about this news article. With this we come to the end of this discussion. That is plate practice questions will be discussed in the last session. Moving on to the last discussion for the day which is based on this news article. The news article discusses about the voluntary retention route scheme of Reserve Bank of India. And this voluntary retention route is a scheme which is related to foreign investments made in India. So, in this context let us see in brief about different types of foreign investments which is available in India. And then we will also see about what do we mean by foreign portfolio investment. And then we will see about this scheme. The syllabus that is relevant to this discussion is given here for your reference. See there are two types of foreign investments that is available in India. One is the foreign direct investment and the other is the foreign portfolio investment. Here foreign portfolio investment means the investments that are made through stock exchanges that is through secondary market. And the investments will be made in various financial instruments like shares, debentures of a company through the secondary market. Whereas if you see the investments that are made through modes other than the stock exchange is called as the foreign direct investment. So, this is the difference between foreign direct investment and foreign portfolio investment. And also remember that foreign investments are a part of India's capital account. So now in order to facilitate the external trade and payments and for promoting the development and maintenance of foreign exchange market in India, a law was enacted by Indian parliament. This law is called as the Foreign Exchange Management Act of 1999 or in short FEMA 1999. Under this law the power of regulating the capital account transactions is vested with RBI. And one of the powers of RBI is to regulate the transfer or issue of any security by a person who is a resident outside India. So, for this purpose RBI has released a set of regulations. One such regulation is the Foreign Exchange Management Regulations of 2000, which is the Foreign Exchange Management Permissible Capital Account Transactions Regulations of 2000. So, through this regulation RBI regulates the type of capital account transactions that are allowed in India. Based on this regulation one of the ways through which a person who is a resident outside India can invest in India is by the way of investing in a security that is issued by a corporate body or by an entity in India. And here the entity can also be a government. See the person can invest in a bond that is raised by the corporate body or the person can invest in the securities or treasury bills of the central government or can also invest in the state development loans in the case of a state. And in this the bonds and securities are debt instruments. It means when a corporate body or an entity wants money then they can issue bonds or securities to raise money. And the foreign portfolio investors will purchase these bonds. This is how the corporate body and entities raise money. And one more relevant regulation is Foreign Exchange Management Transfer of Issue of Security by a Person Resident Outside India Regulations 2017. Under this regulation the purchase and sale of capital instruments by the foreign portfolio investors is regulated. A foreign portfolio investor may undertake short selling as well as lending and borrowing of securities subject to the conditions that are stipulated by RBI and the SEBI from time to time. So based on these regulations majorly and some of the relevant regulations RBI came up with the Voluntary Retention Root Scheme. So what is this scheme? This scheme was introduced by RBI in March 2019. RBI the Reserve Bank in consultation with the Government of India and the Securities and Exchange Board of India that is SEBI has introduced a separate channel to enable the foreign portfolio investors to invest in debt markets in India. And this separate channel is the Voluntary Retention Root. Generally if you see the foreign portfolio investors invest for a short term in the debt instruments. And the main aim of this scheme is to encourage foreign portfolio investors to undertake long term investments in the Indian debt markets. And under this scheme foreign portfolio investors have been given greater operational flexibility in terms of what kind of debt instruments they wish to invest in and also certain exemptions have been given provided that they voluntarily commit to retain a required minimum percentage of their investments in India for a certain period. Now both these indicators are decided by the RBI from time to time. And the participation through this Voluntary Retention Root is entirely voluntary. That is it is up to the foreign portfolio investors to take part and make use of the scheme. So in what instrument the foreign portfolio investors can invest under this scheme? Actually there are three categories where the FBI investors can invest under the scheme. They are the central government securities, state development loans or corporate debt instruments. So these are the crucial facts that you should know with respect to this Voluntary Retention Root. Now when the scheme was introduced in March 2019 the aggregate investment limit under the scheme was set at 75,000 crores. And it was further divided into 40,000 crores for VRR government and 35,000 crores for VRR core. Here you should note that under the VRR government foreign portfolio investors will invest in government securities, treasury bills as well as in state development loans. And under the VRR core the foreign portfolio investors will invest in corporate bonds and debentures that are regulated by RBI as per the foreign exchange management transfer or issue of security by a person resident outside India regulations of 2017. So from this the aggregate investment limit was set at 75,000 crores by RBI. Then the RBI decided that the minimum retention period shall be for 3 years for each allotment that is made by TAP or auction. We know what do we mean by auction? Now let us see what do we mean by TAP? TAP means a TAP sale or TAP issue. It refers to a scenario where the issue of a bond is not placed immediately for the investors for purchase. TAP sale is usually done after the initial primary auction of a security. But TAP sale will not be carried out based on the face value or the predetermined price of the bond in the initial primary auction. See after the initial primary auction of a security the issue or the issue of bonds will remain open for further subscription by the investors. This time of this TAP sale for further subscription will be decided by the issuer. This is because here the issuer holds the sale so that some of its market expectations are met. When we say market expectations we mean that the issuer will go for TAP sale when market will generate more funds by the sale of securities. That is the issuer will make the debt instruments available to investors when market conditions are most favorable. These TAP securities may be sold over a period of a day or even weeks. Here the authorities may retain the flexibility to increase the minimum price if demand proves to be strong or they may also cut the minimum price if demand weakens. So whatever be the predetermined price of the bonds at the initial primary auction during the TAP sale the prices of the bonds are based on the market conditions or the current market prices. Here the rate of interest that is to be paid to the investor and the interest dates then the date of maturity will remain the same as determined in the initial primary auction but the price of bond undergoes change. So for the government know that under the TAP sale the RBI may sell government securities at lower or higher prices than the prevailing market prices. So for this particular VRR scheme RBI has decided that each allotment shall be made by TAP or auction and RBI decided that the minimum investment of a foreign portfolio investor during the retention period shall be 75% of the amount that he commits to invest. And this is called as the committed portfolio size and as per this scheme the first allotment was opened from March 2019 till April 2019. But yesterday that is on 23rd January RBI has released a fresh notification on this voluntary retention route scheme. RBI has decided to reopen the allotment of the investment limit from January 24. The investment limit under this fresh VRR has been increased to 1,50,000 crore and as we saw earlier it was 70,000 crore only. But the retention period has not been changed it is still 3 years only and the investment limits will be available on TAP and it will be allotted on a first come first served basis. Also know that the foreign portfolio investors who wish to invest can apply online to the clearing corporation of India Limited which was set up by RBI in 2001. So these are the information that you should know with respect to the voluntary retention route scheme of RBI. With this we come to the end of news article discussion sessions. The displayed practice question will be discussed in the next session which is the practice questions discussion session. This question is with respect to hydro-metrological disasters. Four options are given and we have to choose which of them are the hydro-metrological disasters. Floods, storm surges, El Nino cyclones. See hydro-metrological disaster is a process or phenomenon of atmospheric nature or hydrological nature or oceanographic nature that may cause loss of life. It may cause injury or other health impacts. It may cause property damage. It will cause social and economic disruption and it will also cause environmental damage. So in this way if you look at the all four options which is given here all of these results in casualties, economic losses, infrastructure damage and disruption to normal life. So here all the four options are hydro-metrological disasters. So the correct answer is option D, 1, 2, 3 and 4. Now this next question is with respect to voluntary retention route scheme. The question asked which of the following represents this voluntary retention route scheme. If you know that this scheme is with respect to foreign investments and it is introduced by RBI then you can directly arrive at the answer which is option B. It is a scheme by RBI to encourage foreign portfolio investors to undertake long term investments in Indian debt markets. Now this next question is based on transparency international. The first statement is it is a united nations body which works together with the governments, businesses and citizens to fight corruption. Yes the main aim of transparency international is to fight corruption only and they work together with governments, businesses and citizens to stop the abuse of power, to stop bribery and secret deals. So whether it is a united nations body, no it is not. Transparency international is an international non-governmental organization which is based in Berlin, Germany. So first statement is wrong. Second statement is it releases the corruption perceptions index. This statement is correct because this index is released by transparency international annually. So here the question asks for the correct statement. The correct answer to this question is option B to only. Now this question is with respect to SARC and we have to choose the incorrect statement. The first statement is it was established in 1985 with an objective to accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in South Asia. Yes it was established in 1985 and this is the objective of SARC. Another objective is to promote and strengthen the collective self-reliance among the countries in South Asia. So this statement is correct but here the question asks for the incorrect statement. So before answering the question whether C the question asks for the correct statement or incorrect statement. Now since this question asks for incorrect statement it should not be in the final answer. So the options A and B can be eliminated. Now with the remaining options statement 3 is present. So from that we can say statement 3 is incorrect. Let us see whether statement 2 is incorrect or not. Second statement is all the countries that share international land border with India are members of SARC. Now for this question you should know two things. First which countries share international land border with India. And second who are the members of SARC. The members of SARC are Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. And the countries that share land border with India are Bangladesh, China, Pakistan, Nepal, Myanmar, Bhutan and Afghanistan. So from this you can see that China and Myanmar which shares land border with India are not members of SARC. So this statement is incorrect only. So the correct answer to this question is option C 2 and 3. Now let us see why statement 3 is incorrect. The statement states the members of BIMSTEC are members of SARC. Now first know that BIMSTEC consists of seven countries as members and SARC has eight member countries. And the full form of BIMSTEC is Bay of Bengal initiative for multi-sectoral technical and economic cohesion. So as the name indicates it consists of the countries that surround the Bay of Bengal. So from these SARC countries you can say Afghanistan is not around Bay of Bengal. So hence it is not a member of BIMSTEC. Now whether the members of BIMSTEC are members of SARC. BIMSTEC has seven members as we saw and they are Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Thailand. And from this you can say Myanmar and Thailand are not members of SARC. So this statement is wrong. Now let us see one main question based on GS paper 2. In the light of recent controversy regarding delay in the execution of death sentence of prisoners do you think the existing guidelines of the Supreme Court is insufficient to ensure the capital punishment reaching its finality? So in this question you can answer in two ways. If you think the guidelines are sufficient you can answer in one way and if you think these guidelines are insufficient then you can answer in another way. Now if you think the guidelines are sufficient then you have to attribute the reasons for the delay to the matters such as delay and implementation of the procedures as required by the guidelines. You may say that delay in decision making of mercy petitions by governor and president. Then you can mention that the existing mechanism ensures a balance between the constitutional rights for prisoners and it ensures the capital punishment reaching its finality. Now if you think it is insufficient then you have to highlight the shortcomings in the 2014 Supreme Court guidelines in the case law of Chaturgan Chauhan and another versus Union of India and others. And in the conclusion you can say how these guidelines can be modified so that it can be ensured that the capital punishment will reach its finality. With this we have come to the end of our analysis sessions. If you like the video don't forget to like, comment and share and do subscribe to Shankar IAS Academy YouTube channel for more updates on civil service examination preparation.