 Welcome to the Hindu News Analysis by Shankarayesh Academy. Displayed other lists of news articles taken for today's analysis and their page numbers in different editions of the newspaper. The link for the handwritten notes in the PDF format and the time stamping of the discussed articles are provided in the description and also in the comment section for the benefit of the viewers. Now let us move on to the analysis of the first news article. This news article is with reference to the rise in tensions between China and Taiwan. The news article states that Taiwan is organizing military drills to counter potential threat from China. In this context, let us try to understand why China and Taiwan are hostile neighbors and why China considers Taiwan as its own province and naming it as Chinese Taipei. The syllabus relevant for the analysis of this news article is highlighted here for your reference. So to understand the ongoing tussle between China and Taiwan, we have to go back to 17th century. See, it is in the 17th century in the year 1644 AD, the last imperial dynasty of China was established. And this dynasty is called as Qing dynasty of China or it is also called as Qing dynasty or Manchu dynasty. This dynasty ruled China until 1911-1912. This dynasty, it gained control of the Taiwan geographical territory in the late 17th century. Close to two centuries later, Japan acquired Taiwan in the year 1895. This is after the first Sino-Japanese war. However, with the defeat of Japan in the World War II in 1945, Taiwan was returned to the nationalist Chinese control. But we have to note that in the year 1949, Chinese communists led by Mao, they defeated the nationalist forces on the mainland and established People's Republic of China in the year 1949. As a result, the nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek moved his government, party and military from China to Taiwan. So this resulted in the separation of Taiwan from China. While mainland China, the government there is known as People's Republic of China, we should know that the government in Taiwan is called as Republic of China. Now coming to the geographical location of Taiwan, see it is located in the western Pacific between Japan and the Philippines. It is located south to the east China sea and it is located off the southeastern coast of China. At the international level, we should know that it was Taiwan which represented China in the United Nations till October 1971. On October 25, 1971, United Nations General Assembly voted to admit People's Republic of China and to expel the Republic of China that is Taiwan. Therefore, the People's Republic of China assumed the place and position of Republic of China or Taiwan's position in the General Assembly and also in the United Nations Security Council. And after this, Chiang's government in Taiwan, it quickly lost its international standing with the politics and pressure of the mainland Chinese government at various international arrangements in which earlier Taiwan was a part. Now if you come to the present stance of China with respect to Taiwan, China maintains that Taiwan is integral to its territory that is Taiwan belongs to China but this is disputed by people and the government in Taiwan and also few other countries. So now what steps China may take you know to integrate Taiwan to itself it bullies with its military might say in some day or other it can generate some international pressure source to annex this part and we are seeing in recent days particularly in the post COVID-19 scenario China is aggressively changing what was the status earlier with India and several other countries in South China Sea with respect to maritime dispute with Philippines China also called null and void an order of the permanent court of arbitration as well well this was earlier in the recent days we could see China aggressively changing status quo with its several neighbors recently we discussed about its role in Bhutan as well that is with reference to sucking wildlife sanctuary of Bhutan seeing all these developments Taiwan prepares to maintain its territorial integrity and therefore it prepares its military for a possible aggression from China in addition to this Taiwan is trying very hard to get international recognition for its sovereignty and also for its representation in many international bodies but in all such bodies China is strongly opposing Taiwan's effort to get international acceptance China's claim is Taiwan will be represented only by itself as it is an integral part of Chinese territory that is a territory of People's Republic of China and with reference to this recently we saw an issue with the World Health Organization as well where Taiwan urged WHO to allow it to rejoin as an observer this was condemned by China and Taiwan was not allowed to rejoin as well in this scenario few days back the upper house of US Congress that is the US Senate it has passed a bill seeking the restoration of Taiwan in WHO so in brief know that currently Taiwan is ruled by its own government and not by China and China considers Taiwan as its integral part as Chinese Taipei while Taiwan considers itself as a sovereign nation Republic of China and before 1971 Taiwan represented China in United Nations which was later replaced by the People's Republic of China or the government in the mainland China so these are some of the important information with reference to the analysis of this news article we discussed about historical relationship of Taiwan with China and the present issues between the mainland Chinese government and the Republic of China in Taiwan now let's move on to the analysis of next news article this editorial is about recent judgment of supreme court which is a filip or boost to the rights of persons with disabilities in this discussion we will see about background of the judgment we'll also see about another important 2012 judgment with reference to persons with disabilities the syllabus relevant for the analysis is highlighted here for your reference first let's see the background of the issue see the judgment of the supreme court is delivered to an appeal against the order of Punjab and Haryana High Court a petition was filed by a person in this Punjab and Haryana High Court the person is intellectually challenged to the extent of 50 percent that is he is a person with benchmark disability according to the rights of person with disabilities act of 2016 so here you can see how the definition of person with benchmark disability varies with the definition of person with disability now this individual has applied for a diploma course in fine arts for physically or mentally challenged students he filed the petition challenging certain provisions of prospectors issued by the government college he claims that there must be a bifurcation of the total available seats between physically challenged students and mentally or intellectually challenged students he also demanded that mentally or intellectually challenged students should be exempted from taking aptitude test now regarding the reservation of persons with disabilities you should know that there are two important sections in the 2016 legislation these are sections 32 and 34 of the act section 32 provides for not less than five percent or at least five percent reservation for persons with benchmark disabilities and this shall be given along with an upper age relaxation of five years for admission in institutions of higher education and section 34 provides for not less than four percent or at least four percent reservation in vacancies in all government establishments then it provides for one person reservation for those suffering from intellectual or allied disability or multiple disabilities that is one person reservation for persons suffering from blindness and low vision one person for persons suffering from deaf and hard of hearing like this for the last two subsections that is D and E total reservation shall be at least one percent so we can observe that around 87 percent of this reservation goes to physically disabled candidates that is the act says at least one percent of reservation shall be for each of the category under A, B, C and one person total at least for D and E category and within this D and E category only D category deals with intellectual or mental disability so this is where the petitioner demanded a bifurcation of total available seats between physically challenged students and mentally and intellectually challenged students but the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the petition and noted that all persons with disability must be treated equally and no benefit shall be given to a class of disabled persons at the expense of another class the court also rejected the demand for exemption from aptitude test as well here additionally based on 2012 case law of Delhi High Court the petitioners argued that an intellectually or mentally challenged student is at least equally deprived as a student belonging to the persons belonging to schedule cast or schedule tribes they argued that if aptitude test has to be taken then minimum passing marks should be reduced to 35 percent as in the case of students belonging to schedule cast and schedule tribes but this argument again was also rejected by the Punjab and Haryana High Court now the 2012 case law is what is called as Anamol Bandari versus Delhi Technological University in this case the court noted that the persons belonging to schedule cast and schedule tribes had been given 10% relaxation in the minimum marks required for admission but candidates belonging to persons with disabilities they were given only 5% relaxation so Delhi High Court held that persons with disabilities should be treated at par with candidates belonging to schedule cast and schedule tribes now let us see on what basis Delhi High Court gave this judgment in 2012 well first is based on constitutional mandates that the constitution of India ensures equality freedom justice and dignity of all individuals under articles 14 16 so here it implicitly mandates the same treatment for persons with disabilities as well secondly it is according to national policy of persons with disabilities of 2006 this policy noted the above constitutional mandate additionally this national policy noted that education is the most effective tool for social and economic empowerment and if you see according to 2001 census 51% of persons with disabilities were illiterate now this situation saw less improvement if you compare with according to 2011 census 54% of disabled children with multiple disabilities never attended educational institutions also 50% of children with mental illness never attended education institution and overall only 55% of the total disabled population are literates now this means around 45% of persons with disabilities are illiterate according to 2011 census so the national policy urged that if any meaningful rights are to be given to persons with disabilities then prime importance is to be given to educate them this is because disability may act as a major impediment in formal education so based on these things Delhi High Court recognized that without imparting proper education to persons suffering from disabilities there cannot be any meaningful enforcement of rights of PWDs under the constitution thirdly with respect to the reservation and treatment for persons with disabilities the Delhi High Court noted that persons with disabilities who belong to schedule caste or schedule tribes they would automatically enjoy the benefit of relaxation available for schedule caste and schedule tribe categories for example like age relaxation or the cutoff marks or the minimum required marks etc but persons with disabilities belonging to obc and general categories they are treated differently for example they will have higher cutoff marks and other treatment so the court observed that this is a differential treatment and is discriminatory to persons with disabilities of obc and the general categories so Delhi High Court noted that there is no reason why the benefits of candidates belonging to schedule caste schedule tribes in general should not be extended to the entire class of persons with disabilities court noted that such a process only will bring parity among all persons with disabilities that is the understanding is that let the persons with disabilities across all categories including obc general category sc st be considered as a single group and let them enjoy common benefits as a whole so this will bring additional benefits relaxations among the persons with disabilities as the same benefits so based on these points Delhi High Court ruled that people suffering from disabilities are equally socially backward as persons belonging to schedule caste and schedule tribes so therefore as per constitutional mandates they are entitled to that is the persons with disabilities are entitled to at least the same benefit of relaxation that is given to schedule caste and schedule tribe candidates so this 2012 judgment of Delhi High Court is important because in the recent case when the petitioner filed an appeal to the supreme court the supreme court upheld this 2012 judgment of the Delhi High Court and has passed order here note that supreme court first upheld the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court with respect to bifurcation of total seats and exemption from aptitude test the apex court noted that no exemption can be given but it ultimately followed the principle that is laid down in 2012 judgment by the Delhi High Court see supreme court recognized the struggle faced by persons with disabilities in accessing education or employment regardless of their social status therefore it upheld that people suffering from disabilities are also socially backward and therefore at the very least they must be entitled to same benefits as given to persons belonging to schedule caste and schedule tribes so supreme court held that 35 percent required to pass in the aptitude test with reference to persons belonging to schedule caste and schedule tribes the same shall apply to disabled persons in future now with respect to this supreme court verdict there is one argument which is noted by this editorial that some experts observe that by eliminating the distinction between the disabled and the persons belonging to schedule caste and schedule tribes there is an attempt to equate physical or mental disability with the social disability and the experience of untouchability suffered by marginal sections for several centuries they argue that persons with disability from a traditionally privileged community has a better social background and advantage over those persons with disabilities suffering from historical social disability now we saw in the census data that there is extremely low literacy rate among persons with disabilities and this leads to low employment rates in general and the persons with disabilities are deprived of a dignified life as well so to bridge this gap the right of persons with disabilities act 2016 raised the reservation to 5 percent from the existing 3 percent this 3 percent reservation was as per persons with disabilities act of 1995 note that the 2016 act repealed this 1995 legislation and one more sale in feature if you talk about the 2016 laws that there is an enabling provision to provide incentives to employers in private sector that is government can provide incentives to the private sector to ensure that at least 5 percent of their workforce is composed of persons with benchmark disability finally the government's role is to give full effect to these provisions so that persons belonging to disabilities among the population is not left out of social and economic advancement now one main inference from this article discussion is that what the editorial implies is there must be a separate category of reservation and relaxation for all the persons belonging to persons with disabilities to give effect they may be given a separate reservation not within obc's not within scst's and they may be considered at par with at least persons belonging to schedule cast and schedule tribes so with this we come to the end of analysis of this editorial in this editorial we saw the background of recent supreme court judgment and we discussed about the 2012 judgment of telly high court which was upheld recently by the supreme court from this discussion take note of the sections that we have discussed from rights of persons with disabilities act of 2016 as there could be a main question on this legislation now let us move on to next news article this news article is about maternal mortality ratio article notes that maternal mortality ratio in india has declined in the time period 2016 to 18 the data is provided by sample registration system which is the largest demographic sample survey that provides direct estimates of maternal mortality through a nationally representative sample this data is released by the office of the registrar general india under the ministry of home affairs using sample registration system see maternal mortality in a region it is a measure of reproductive health of women in the area many women in reproductive age span they die because of complications during pregnancy then following pregnancy and childbirth are due to abortion according to world health organization maternal death is the death of a woman while pregnant or death of a woman within 42 days of termination of pregnancy this is irrespective of the duration of pregnancy or the site or place of residence maternal death is related to causes related to pregnancy or causes aggravated by the pregnancy or management of such causes but maternal death does not include accidental or incidental causes that is it does not include causes other than causes related to pregnancy now know that one of the key indicators of maternal mortality is maternal mortality ratio it is defined as number of maternal deaths during a given time period per 1 lakh live births during the same time period here it is important for us to know about stg goal that is related to it which is goal number three good health and well under this goal there is a target 3.1 which states that the aim is to reduce global maternal mortality ratio to less than 70 per 1 lakh live births this is to be achieved by the year 2030 now where do india stand with reference to achieving this target cvr still far from achieving according to recent srs data the maternal mortality ratio of india is 113 in the period 2016 to 2018 but this is seen as a success because mmr has actually declined from 122 in the time period 2015 to 17 and from 130 in the period 2014 to 16 so we can see a gradual reduction in mmr now with respect to states highest maternal mortality ratio is seen in the state of azam that is 215 this is followed by utha padesh where it is 197 there is one positive note that is the southern states which are andhra pradesh telangana tamil nadu kerala and karnataka for these states their maternal mortality ratio is less than national maternal mortality ratio that is for these states maternal mortality ratio is less than 113 and these states are classified as southern states as per the sample registration system the better performer with respect to maternal mortality ratio with the state of kerala with the number 43 and normally there is a confusion with respect to maternal mortality ratio and maternal mortality rate but there is a slight difference it was also noted in the recently released document by ministry of home office see maternal mortality rate is the maternal deaths of women in the ages 15 to 49 per 1 lakh women in that age group now this data related to maternal mortality rate is important particularly to bring policy responses in general for reproductive health here we find that age group is given importance now coming to maternal mortality ratio definition it is defined as number of maternal deaths during a given time period per 1 lakh live births during the same period so these are some of the important information with reference to the analysis of this news article now let's move on to next article this news article is with reference to the political tamil happening in the ruling congress party in rajasthan the rajasthan assembly speaker has issued disqualification notices to the congress leader sachin pilot and some other mls these mls they are moving to the high court challenging the notice issued by the assembly speaker for our today's analysis let us talk about the speaker not in the state legislative assembly but of the lokshaba and also the presiding officer of rajasabha now with reference to disqualification and matters related to the 10th schedule we have discussed in detail on our 9th june 2020 hindu news analysis the syllabus relevant for the analysis of this news article is highlighted here for your reference see each house of parliament has its own presiding officer in case of lokshaba it is the speaker in case of rajasabha it is the chairman now coming to the speaker the speaker of lokshaba is elected from its members and whenever the office of speaker falls vacant the lokshaba elects another member to fill the vacancy of the speaker now the date of election of the speaker is fixed by the president and note that whenever the lokshaba is dissolved the speaker does not vacate her office and the speaker continues till the meeting of newly elected lokshaba now coming to roles and functions of speaker the speaker is the head of the lokshaba she is the guardian of powers and privileges of the members and also the guardian of powers and privileges of the house as a whole and also its committees know that the speaker's decision in all parliamentary matters is final the speaker derives her powers and duties from three sources a constitution of india the rules of procedure and conduct of business of lokshaba and also from parliamentary conventions now let's see some of the powers and duties of speaker her primary responsibility is to maintain order and decorum in the lokshaba for conducting its business she is the final interpreter of the provisions of the constitution within lokshaba and also she is the final interpreter of the rules of procedure and conduct of business of lokshaba as well and it is the speaker who adjourns the lokshaba in the absence of a quorum here quorum when we say it refers to one-tenth of the total strength of lokshaba you should know that the speaker does not vote in the first instance but makes a casting vote in case of a time speaker of lokshaba resides over a joint sitting of two houses of parliament when such a sitting is summoned by the resident and with reference to money bill it is the speaker of lokshaba who decides whether a bill is money bill or not and her decision on this matter is final now apart from these the speaker also decides on the questions of disqualification of a member of lokshaba arising on the ground of defection under the tenth schedule but as per earlier judgments of the supreme court this decision of the speaker is subject to judicial review so generally we can see that a speaker is provided with security of tenure the salaries and allowances are fixed by parliament they are charged on the consolidated fund of india therefore they are not subject to the vote of parliament and the work and conduct of speaker cannot be discussed and criticized in the lokshaba except on a substantive motion the speaker of lokshaba is given a very high position in the order of presidents the speaker is placed along with the chief justice of india now coming to the presiding officer of rajeshabha it is the chairman the vice president of india is the ex-officio chairman of rajeshabha but when vice president acts as president or when vice president discharges the functions of the president she or he does not perform the duties of the office of chairman of rajeshabha know that the chairman of rajeshabha can be removed from his or her office only if the person is removed from the office of vice president and as a presiding officer the powers and functions of chairman and rajeshabha are similar to those of the speaker in lokshaba however there are two three distinctions the speaker of lokshaba has two or three special roles that are not enjoyed by the chairman one as we saw earlier the speaker of lokshaba decides whether a bill is money bill or not then the speaker presides over joint sitting of two houses of parliament here we can see that speaker is a member of a house the chairman of rajeshabha is not a member of the house therefore the speaker of lokshaba presides over a joint sitting of two houses in case speaker is absent it will be presided by deputy speaker of lokshaba if deputy speaker is also absent it will be presided by the deputy chairman of rajeshabha if deputy chairman is also absent then such other person as may be determined by the members present at the joint sitting will preside over the meeting with this we come to the end of the discussion related to this news article we discussed about the presiding officers of both houses of parliament we saw the functions and powers associated with them now let's move on to the analysis of next news article this news article is with reference to sero or serum sample testing done by the national center for disease control the center has told the delhi high court that the preliminary result of sero surveillance sample testing across delhi will take at least another week in this context let us discuss in brief about the national center for disease control and we'll conclude the discussion by seeing also about the national institute of virology coming to this national center for disease control know that it is under the administrative control of director general of health services of ministry of health and family welfare if you see the origin of this center it is with the central malaria bureau which was established in the year 1909 then a development happened in the year 1938 when the central malarial bureau was renamed as malarial institute of india later the activities of this institute were expanded so as to cover communicable diseases and therefore in 1963 it was renamed as national institute of communicable diseases and a recent development happened in the first decade of the 21st century that is in 2009 it was transformed into national center for disease control with a larger mandate of controlling emerging diseases and re-emerging diseases at present this center is headquartered in delhi now coming to its functions very importantly it functions as nodal agency in the country for disease surveillance then facilitating prevention and control of communicable diseases it functions in coordination with the state governments and it has the capacity and capability for disease surveillance outbreak investigation then giving rapid response to contain and combat outbreaks it is also having a separate division which deals with entomology and vector management with reference to diseases and we should know that this center is also dealing with antimicrobial resistance which is an emerging area of concern now let's come to national institute of virology which is often seen in the news see it is one of the major institutes of indian council of medical research it was established in punay in the year 1952 as a virus research center under the support of icmr and rockerfella foundation of usa it was an outcome of the global program of rockerfella foundation for investigating arthropod born viruses however in the year 1967 rockerfella foundation withdraw its support to the center and since then national institute of virology is entirely funded by icmr in 1967 it was also designated as one of the collaborating laboratories of who and in 1969 it started functioning as the regional center of who for southeast asia for arbo virus studies that is any of the group of viruses that are transmitted by mosquitoes ticks or other arthropods i know that this institute is also the national center for hepatitis and influenza now the research areas of niv include cell repository electron microscopy rickets yosus hepatitis influenza and related viruses it also includes clinical virology biochemistry virus registry and also bio statistics so these are some of the important information with reference to the national institute of virology and also the national center for disease control now let's move on to next part of the discussion we have come to the last session the practice questions discussion session this question is with respect to the powers of speaker of lokshaba three statements are given which of the statements given above are not correct first statement the speaker decides whether a bill is a money bill or not and here are his decision on this question is final the statement is correct so it should not be present in the option so eliminate option a now statement two in the absence of the speaker the chairman of rajeshiva presides over a joint sitting of the two houses of the parliament this statement is incorrect so any statement must have this statement in the answer second statement eliminate option b now we have to find out whether third statement is incorrect or not see the decision of speaker on disqualification of a member of the lokshaba on the ground of defection under 10 schedule is subject to judicial review this statement is correct as per the judgments of supreme court particularly the judgment made in the 1992 kihoto holohon case so we can find only the second statement is incorrect therefore the correct answer is option c note that in the absence of speaker a joint sitting will be presided by deputy speaker if deputy speaker is also absent then it will be presided by deputy chairman of rajeshiva this question is with reference to thai one consider the following statements two statements are given which of the statements given above are correct thai one enjoys semi-autonomous status through the principle of one country two systems this statement is incorrect because one country two systems policy is implemented in hong kong and in macaw not in thai one second statement till 1971 thai one represented china and united nations generally we can say this statement is correct till october 1971 it was republic of china or thai one that represented china in united nations so correct answer is option b two only this question is with reference to national center for disease control three statements are given which of the statements given above are correct national institute of communicable diseases was transformed into national center for disease control in 2019 with the larger mandate of controlling the covid-19 pandemic in india now this statement is wrong so easily arrive at the correct answer option b two and three only see the national institute of communicable diseases was renamed as national center for disease control in the year 2009 it was given a larger mandate of controlling emerging diseases and re-emerging diseases second and third statements are correct correct answer is option b two and three only see this question which of the following statements are not correct with reference to maternal mortality ratio the maternal mortality ratio of india has declined in 2016 to 18 this statement is correct as per the recent release of office of the registrar general india of ministry of home affairs the second statement the southern states of india have higher maternal mortality ratio than the national maternal mortality ratio this statement is not correct it is actually lower maternal mortality ratio than the national mmr so the correct answer for this question is option b two only they are asking incorrect statements see this main question in gs2 do you agree with the view that a separate reservation for persons with disability should be made on par or more than the reservation for candidates from scheduled cars scheduled tribe categories discuss for this question you may take valid points from our discussion today and you have to discuss these points in the context of your view with reference to the question with this we come to the end of today's the hindi news analysis if you like the video if you would have enjoyed the content don't fail to click the like button and share this resource among your friends and those who are in need of such resources and subscribe to the shankarai's academy youtube channel to get notified about new updates