Career Pathway

+91-98052 91450

info@thecareerspath.com

EDITORIAL TODAY (ENGLISH)

In this section, we are presenting our readers/aspirants compilation of selected editorials of national daily viz. The Hindu, The live mint,The Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Economic Times, PIB etc. This section caters the requirement of Civil Services Mains (GS + Essay) , PCS, HAS Mains (GS + Essay) & others essay writing competitions

1.With GoI warning states of an Omicron surge, it must also approve booster doses

With the Omicron variant rapidly becoming the dominant variant of concern in many countries and GoI warning state governments to firm up their emergency healthcare apparatus, the silence on booster doses comes as a surprise. A new Lancet study has just indicated that the protection offered by the Astrazeneca (Covishield) vaccine drops after three months. This would be worrying news for healthcare workers who were the first to get inoculated when India’s vaccination programme began in January.

The implication from the Lancet study is that the protection for healthcare workers from vaccines could be the lowest among vaccine recipients. Meanwhile, GoI’s communication to states warning that Omicron could be at least three times more infectious than the Delta variant warns of a coming deluge of cases if Omicron is able to escape the immunity accorded by previous Delta infections and vaccines.

Even if Omicron is milder, India’s uneven healthcare infrastructure, poor masking habits, difficulty of social distancing, and the large number of people in the country with comorbidities who are susceptible to severe Covid demands that a Covid surge of the kind witnessed during April and May must be averted at all costs. Instead of movement curbs like night curfews, what has been proven to work is vaccination. Approve boosters while there is still time.

2.Aadhaar, again: Electoral roll data linkage to Aadhaar ecosystem is a big change. Ordinary citizens mustn’t suffer

Amendments to the Representation of the People (RP) Act requiring voters to furnish their Aadhaar numbers to electoral registration officers were introduced, considered and passed in both Houses of Parliament, all in a few hours, without any meaningful debate. Union law minister Kiren Rijiju cited the need to clean up the electoral rolls – specifically, RP Act provisions barring people from being registered as voters from more than one constituency, and preventing bogus voting.

Rijiju also claimed the amendments met the Puttaswamy judgment’s triple test of legality, need, and proportionality, which is now used to assess the permissible limits of invasion of privacy. Yes, this Bill did pass Parliament unlike Election Commission’s 2015 seeding of over 30 crore voter IDs with Aadhaar. But the achievement of the legality requirement to meet privacy safeguards would have been bolstered manifold by a thorough discussion in Parliament, allowing further finetuning of the Act’s provisions. In following the template set by farm laws, GoI may have unnecessarily exposed itself to stiff legal challenges, even if street agitations like those by farmers don’t happen.

Since the Bill only sanctions Aadhaar number and not biometric verification, it essentially boils down to a test of identity between details in the voter ID and Aadhaar card. Even small variances in name, address, age etc could see lower level bureaucrats enjoying outsized discretion to accept or reject electoral roll entries. RP Act’s new Section 23(6) allows those unable to furnish Aadhaar numbers for “prescribed” reasons to produce alternate documents. But the poor, without other documents to prove their identities and whose details may vary between their Aadhaar and voter card, could be hit hardest.

Also, while Rijiju has said the linking is voluntary and not mandatory, amendments say electoral officers “may” ask for Aadhaar. This “may” may become worryingly widespread. Further, Section 23(5) suggests that GoI could notify a date in the gazette by which time every person in the electoral roll “may” intimate his/her Aadhaar number to authorities. The worry is what happens if a citizen doesn’t do this.

The right to vote is a statutory right and it mustn’t be denied to citizens without rigorous due process and just cause. EC must ensure every electoral roll entry struck off through this new process is independently verified by booth level officers on the ground. The impending big change to our electoral rolls should be foolproof and abuse-proof.

3.Thinking before linking: On linking electoral rolls with Aadhaar

Despite progressive aspects, linking electoral rolls with Aadhaar raises apprehensions

An unwillingness to allow meaningful debate and invite wider consultation can undo even the progressive aspects of problematic legislation. Ignoring protests, the Union government has managed to push through a Bill in Parliament to link electoral roll data with the Aadhaar ecosystem. On the face of it, the Bill’s objective — to purify the rolls and weed out bogus voters — may appear laudable, and the seeding of Aadhaar data with voter identity particulars may seem to be a good way of achieving it. Indeed, this can also allow for remote voting, a measure that could help migrant voters. The four qualifying dates for revision of rolls will help in faster enrolment of those who turn 18. However, other aspects hold grave implications for electoral democracy. The Opposition underscored the possible disenfranchisement of legitimate voters unwilling or unable to submit Aadhaar details, the possible violation of privacy, and the possibility that demographic details may be misused for profiling of voters. Each is a valid concern that ought to be considered by a parliamentary committee. Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju has said the proposal has been unanimously approved by the Parliamentary Committee on Law and Justice. But, it is not clear if the specifics of the Bill had been discussed widely and public opinion sought.

There are indeed complaints that some electors may be registered in more than one constituency and that non-citizens have been enrolled, but these can be addressed by other identification processes. In fact, the Aadhaar database may be irrelevant to verify voter identity because it is an identifier of residents and not citizens. And the complaints of wrongful enrolment have come up even against the unique identity number allotted to more than 90% of the population. Mr. Rijiju is confident that the Election Laws (Amendment) Bill satisfies the tests laid down by the Supreme Court — a permissible law, a legitimate state interest and proportionality. However, this has to be rigorously examined. Even though the Aadhaar requirement is said to be voluntary, in practice it can be made mandatory. The Bill says the election registration officer may require the submission of the Aadhaar number both for new enrolments and those already enrolled. The choice not to submit is linked to a “sufficient cause”, which will be separately prescribed. Whether the few permissible reasons not to intimate one’s Aadhaar number include an objection on principle is unknown. If an individual’s refusal to submit the detail is deemed unacceptable, it may result in loss of franchise. Therefore, the measure may fail the test of proportionality. If the Government really has no ulterior motive in the form of triggering mass deletions from the electoral rolls, it must invite public opinion and allow deeper parliamentary scrutiny before implementing the new provisions that now have the approval of both Houses of Parliam

4.Thinking before linking: On linking electoral rolls with Aadhaar

Despite progressive aspects, linking electoral rolls with Aadhaar raises apprehensions

An unwillingness to allow meaningful debate and invite wider consultation can undo even the progressive aspects of problematic legislation. Ignoring protests, the Union government has managed to push through a Bill in Parliament to link electoral roll data with the Aadhaar ecosystem. On the face of it, the Bill’s objective — to purify the rolls and weed out bogus voters — may appear laudable, and the seeding of Aadhaar data with voter identity particulars may seem to be a good way of achieving it. Indeed, this can also allow for remote voting, a measure that could help migrant voters. The four qualifying dates for revision of rolls will help in faster enrolment of those who turn 18. However, other aspects hold grave implications for electoral democracy. The Opposition underscored the possible disenfranchisement of legitimate voters unwilling or unable to submit Aadhaar details, the possible violation of privacy, and the possibility that demographic details may be misused for profiling of voters. Each is a valid concern that ought to be considered by a parliamentary committee. Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju has said the proposal has been unanimously approved by the Parliamentary Committee on Law and Justice. But, it is not clear if the specifics of the Bill had been discussed widely and public opinion sought.

There are indeed complaints that some electors may be registered in more than one constituency and that non-citizens have been enrolled, but these can be addressed by other identification processes. In fact, the Aadhaar database may be irrelevant to verify voter identity because it is an identifier of residents and not citizens. And the complaints of wrongful enrolment have come up even against the unique identity number allotted to more than 90% of the population. Mr. Rijiju is confident that the Election Laws (Amendment) Bill satisfies the tests laid down by the Supreme Court — a permissible law, a legitimate state interest and proportionality. However, this has to be rigorously examined. Even though the Aadhaar requirement is said to be voluntary, in practice it can be made mandatory. The Bill says the election registration officer may require the submission of the Aadhaar number both for new enrolments and those already enrolled. The choice not to submit is linked to a “sufficient cause”, which will be separately prescribed. Whether the few permissible reasons not to intimate one’s Aadhaar number include an objection on principle is unknown. If an individual’s refusal to submit the detail is deemed unacceptable, it may result in loss of franchise. Therefore, the measure may fail the test of proportionality. If the Government really has no ulterior motive in the form of triggering mass deletions from the electoral rolls, it must invite public opinion and allow deeper parliamentary scrutiny before implementing the new provisions that now have the approval of both Houses of Parliam

 

 

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top