Model Answer:

The Maldives, an archipelagic nation in the Indian Ocean, holds significant geopolitical and geostrategic importance for India, particularly in terms of global trade, energy flows, maritime security, and regional stability.

Geopolitical and Geostrategic Importance:

• The Maldives sits astride major sea lanes of communication (SLOCs) in the Indian Ocean, through which a substantial portion of global trade and energy resources transit.
• Its strategic location allows for monitoring and potential control of these vital maritime routes, enhancing its significance in global trade networks.
• The country’s proximity to key choke points like the Strait of Hormuz and Strait of Malacca amplifies its importance in securing energy flows from the Middle East to East Asia.
• For India, the Maldives provides crucial strategic depth in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR), acting as a buffer against potential threats and enhancing India’s regional influence.

Impact on India’s Maritime Security:

• The Maldives serves as a key partner in India’s maritime domain awareness efforts, contributing to enhanced surveillance capabilities in the IOR.
• Collaboration between the two nations strengthens anti-piracy operations, safeguarding vital shipping lanes.
• The partnership facilitates joint humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations, bolstering regional maritime security cooperation.

Regional Stability and International Competition:

• China’s growing economic and strategic presence in the Maldives poses challenges to India’s traditional sphere of influence, necessitating careful diplomatic balancing.
• India-Maldives relations play a crucial role in maintaining the regional power equilibrium, with implications for broader Indian Ocean stability.
• Multilateral initiatives like the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) provide platforms for cooperation, helping to mitigate international competition.
• Strong economic ties between India and the Maldives contribute to regional stability by fostering mutual dependence and shared interests.

Conclusion: The Maldives remains pivotal to India’s maritime strategy, balancing regional power dynamics and securing vital trade routes in an increasingly competitive Indian Ocean landscape.

Model Answer:

UN Security Council established the Counter Terrorism Committee

The UN Security Council established the Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC) in 2001 to address the growing threat of global terrorism. The CTC, along with its Executive Directorate (CTED) and the UN Office of Counter-Terrorism (UNOCT), works to strengthen member states’ ability to prevent and combat terrorism.

Effectiveness of the CTC and associated bodies:

1. Policy development:
• Successfully established international norms and guidelines for counter-terrorism
• Facilitated adoption of key resolutions, providing a framework for national strategies

2. Capacity building:
• Conducted technical assistance programs to improve member states’ counter-terrorism capabilities
• Helped enhance border security, legal frameworks, and financial intelligence units

3. Information sharing:
• Created platforms for exchanging best practices and intelligence among countries
• Improved global coordination in counter-terrorism efforts

4. Challenges:
• Lacks enforcement power, limiting ability to ensure compliance with recommendations
• Uneven cooperation among member states hinders uniform implementation
• Struggles to keep pace with evolving threats like lone-wolf attacks and online radicalization

5. Coordination efforts:
• Improved collaboration with regional organizations and other UN agencies
• Some duplication of efforts still exists, reducing overall efficiency

6. Impact assessment:
• Raised global awareness of terrorism threats
• Difficult to measure direct impact on reducing terrorism due to complex nature of the threat
• Some success in disrupting terrorist financing and improving legal frameworks

While the CTC has made significant contributions to global counter-terrorism efforts, its effectiveness is limited by its advisory nature and the varying commitment of member states. The committee has been more successful in norm-setting and capacity building than in direct threat reduction.

Model Answer:

E-governance extends beyond the mere application of digital technology in service delivery. It encompasses a complex web of interactions aimed at enhancing transparency and accountability in governance. The Interactive Service Model plays a crucial role in achieving these objectives.

• Multifaceted Nature of E-governance:

– E-governance facilitates multi-directional communication between government, citizens, businesses, and other stakeholders.
– It enables real-time information sharing, feedback mechanisms, and participatory decision-making processes.
– These interactions foster transparency by making government operations more visible and accessible to the public.
– E-governance promotes accountability by creating digital trails of transactions and decisions, enabling easier audits and oversight.

• Interactive Service Model:

– This model emphasizes two-way communication between government and citizens through digital platforms.
– It allows citizens to not only access services but also provide feedback, report issues, and participate in policy discussions.
– Key features include online forums, social media integration, mobile apps, and interactive websites.
– The model supports personalized service delivery by tailoring information and services to individual citizen needs and preferences.

• Evaluation of the Interactive Service Model:

– Enhances transparency: Citizens can track the status of their requests and monitor government activities in real-time.
– Improves accountability: Officials are more responsive due to public visibility of their actions and decisions.
– Increases efficiency: Streamlines service delivery by identifying bottlenecks and areas for improvement based on user feedback.
– Promotes inclusivity: Provides multiple channels for citizen engagement, accommodating diverse needs and preferences.
– Fosters innovation: Encourages the development of new solutions and services based on citizen input and changing societal needs.

• Challenges:
– Digital divide may limit access for certain segments of the population.
– Requires continuous technological upgrades and maintenance.
– Ensuring data privacy and security in interactive platforms.
– Managing and responding to the increased volume of citizen feedback and interactions can strain government resources.

Conclusion: The Interactive Service Model significantly advances e-governance by fostering citizen engagement, thereby enhancing transparency and accountability in government operations.

Model Answer:

Indian public healthcare system

The Indian public healthcare system faces significant challenges due to increasing marketization, necessitating a vital role for the state to mitigate adverse impacts and ensure equitable access. The government must strike a balance between market forces and public welfare to enhance healthcare reach at the grassroots level.

Key measures the state can implement include:

1. Strengthening Primary Healthcare Centers (PHCs):
• Increase the number and improve the distribution of PHCs in rural and underserved areas.
• Ensure adequate staffing, equipment, and medicine supply in these centers.
• Implement regular quality audits and performance evaluations.

2. Leveraging Technology:
• Expand telemedicine services to connect remote areas with specialized healthcare providers.
• Implement e-health records for better patient management and data-driven policy decisions.
• Utilize mobile health applications for health education and remote monitoring.

3. Enhancing Community-based Healthcare:
• Increase the number of ASHA (Accredited Social Health Activist) workers and provide them with better training and resources.
• Strengthen the role of Anganwadi centers in providing basic health services and nutrition support.
• Promote community participation in health planning and monitoring.

4. Improving Health Infrastructure:
• Develop a tiered healthcare system with clear referral pathways from primary to tertiary care.
• Invest in mobile medical units to reach remote areas.
• Upgrade existing facilities with modern equipment and technologies.

5. Addressing Marketization Concerns:
• Implement and enforce regulations on private healthcare costs and quality standards.
• Expand coverage of health insurance schemes like Ayushman Bharat to reduce out-of-pocket expenses.
• Develop public-private partnerships with robust oversight to leverage private sector efficiency while ensuring public welfare.

6. Promoting Health Education:
• Launch comprehensive health awareness campaigns focusing on preventive care and healthy lifestyles.
• Integrate health education into school curricula to foster long-term health consciousness.

Conclusion: State intervention in healthcare is crucial to balance market forces and ensure equitable access, ultimately improving public health outcomes at the grassroots level.

Model Answer:

Citizens’ Charter

The Citizens’ Charter was introduced in India in 1997 as part of the “Action Plan for Effective and Responsive Government”. Inspired by the UK’s model, it was implemented following recommendations from the Conference of Chief Secretaries in 1996.

This vital initiative aims at ensuring transparent, accountable, and citizen-centric administration. It outlines the services provided by government agencies, along with their quality standards, time frames, and grievance redressal mechanisms. While the Charter has improved public service delivery in some areas, it has yet to reach its full potential due to several factors:

1. Lack of awareness: Many citizens remain unaware of the Charter’s existence and its provisions. For example, a 2019 study in Delhi found that only 23% of respondents knew about the Citizens’ Charter of their local municipal corporation.

2. Poor implementation: Weak enforcement mechanisms and a lack of commitment from some government departments have hindered the Charter’s effectiveness. The absence of penalties for non-compliance often leads to its provisions being ignored.

3. Absence of legal backing: Unlike the Right to Information Act, the Citizens’ Charter lacks statutory support, making it difficult to enforce its commitments.

4. Resistance from bureaucracy: Some officials view the Charter as an additional burden, leading to half-hearted implementation. This mindset hampers the Charter’s potential to transform public service delivery.

5. Lack of regular updates: Many Charters are outdated and fail to reflect current service standards or technological advancements.

To overcome these challenges and realize the Charter’s full potential, the following measures can be implemented:

• Launch extensive awareness campaigns through various media channels and include information about the Charter in school curricula.

• Strengthen implementation by establishing monitoring committees and introducing performance-based incentives for departments adhering to Charter commitments.

• Enact legislation to give legal backing to the Citizens’ Charter, similar to the United Kingdom’s “Public Service Guarantee Act.”

• Conduct regular training programs for government officials to change mindsets and build capacity for citizen-centric service delivery.

• Mandate annual reviews and updates of the Charter with active citizen participation, ensuring its relevance and effectiveness.

Conclusion: Overcoming these challenges will transform the Citizens’ Charter from a symbolic document into a powerful tool for ensuring responsive and accountable governance.

Model Answer:

India and the United States are both secular states, but they approach secularism differently due to their distinct historical and social contexts.

India as a Secular State:

• The Indian Constitution enshrines secularism through Articles 25-28 (freedom of religion) and 29-30 (cultural and educational rights of minorities).
• India follows a “positive secularism” or “principled distance” approach, where the state maintains equal respect for all religions while retaining the right to intervene for social reform.
• This allows for state involvement in religious institutions, such as the management of religious properties and the abolition of practices like untouchability.
• The Indian model acknowledges the country’s deep-rooted religious diversity and aims to create harmony among various faiths.

Secular Principles in the US Constitution:

• The First Amendment establishes two key principles: the Establishment Clause (prohibiting state-sponsored religion) and the Free Exercise Clause (protecting religious practice).
• The US adopts a “wall of separation” approach between church and state, as articulated by Thomas Jefferson.
• This strict neutrality limits government involvement in religious affairs and vice versa.
• The focus is on individual religious freedom with minimal state intervention.

Comparison:

• While India actively engages with religions to ensure equality and social justice, the US maintains a hands-off approach to avoid favoring any religion.
• India’s secularism allows for differential treatment of religious groups to protect minorities, whereas the US emphasizes equal treatment under law.
• Both countries aim to protect religious freedom, but India’s approach is more interventionist due to its complex religious landscape and history of communal tensions.
• The US model evolved from a predominantly Christian society, while India’s secularism addresses a highly diverse religious population.

Conclusion:
Both nations uphold secularism, adapting their approaches to unique historical and social contexts while striving for religious freedom and equality.

Model Answer:

Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India has grown significantly since its inception in the 1980s. The reasons for this growth include:

• Relaxation of locus standi: The Supreme Court eased rules for filing cases, allowing any public-spirited individual to petition on behalf of the marginalized.

• Judicial activism: The judiciary took a proactive stance in addressing social issues. The Vishaka case (1997) is a prime example, where the court laid down guidelines for preventing sexual harassment at workplaces.

• Socio-economic conditions: Widespread poverty and governance gaps necessitated judicial intervention. The Right to Food case (2001) led to the implementation of mid-day meal schemes in schools.

• Constitutional interpretation: Liberal interpretation of fundamental rights broadened the scope for PILs. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the court expanded the interpretation of Article 21.

• Increased awareness: Growing rights consciousness led to more people seeking judicial remedies for societal issues.

As a result, the Indian Supreme Court has emerged as a powerful judiciary:

• Expanded jurisdiction: The court now addresses various social and environmental issues. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1988), it tackled environmental pollution, leading to the closure of polluting tanneries.

• Policy influence: PILs have shaped government policies. The Vineet Narain case (1998) led to systemic changes in the CBI’s functioning.

• Monitoring role: The court issues directives to executive bodies and monitors implementation. In the 2G spectrum case (2012), it oversaw the investigation and cancelled 122 telecom licenses.

• Constitutional guardian: PILs have reinforced the court’s role as the protector of rights. The Right to Privacy judgment (2017) declared privacy a fundamental right.

• Global precedent: The Indian model of PIL has influenced judicial systems in other countries, particularly in South Asia.

Conclusion: PILs have transformed India’s Supreme Court into a powerful institution with far-reaching influence on governance and social justice.

Model Answer:

Centre-State Relations

Centre-State relations are a crucial aspect of India’s federal structure, ensuring balanced governance and development across the nation. The Union Government has recently introduced several changes in this domain:

• Implementation of Goods and Services Tax (GST): This major fiscal reform has altered the tax collection and distribution mechanism between the Centre and States, impacting financial autonomy.

• Amendments to All India Services rules: Changes in deputation and transfer policies have given the Centre more control over IAS, IPS, and IFoS officers, affecting state administrative autonomy.

• Restructuring of Centrally Sponsored Schemes: The rationalization of these schemes has led to changes in funding patterns and implementation processes, influencing state-level development initiatives.

• NITI Aayog’s evolving role: As a replacement for the Planning Commission, NITI Aayog’s functioning has redefined Centre-State planning and policy coordination mechanisms.

To build trust and strengthen federalism, the following measures can be adopted:

1. Revitalize the Inter-State Council:
• Hold regular meetings to discuss and resolve Centre-State issues
• Ensure follow-up actions on decisions taken during these meetings

2. Enhance fiscal federalism:
• Review and refine GST implementation based on state feedback
• Ensure timely release of states’ share in central taxes and grants

3. Strengthen cooperative federalism:
• Involve states more actively in formulating national policies
• Respect state autonomy in subjects under the State List

4. Reform the role of Governors:
• Establish clear guidelines for Governor appointments and functions
• Ensure impartiality in their role as a link between Centre and States

5. Empower local self-governance:
• Strengthen Panchayati Raj Institutions and urban local bodies
• Ensure devolution of funds, functions, and functionaries

Conclusion: Balancing Centre-State relations is vital for India’s governance. Trust-building and strengthening federalism require continuous dialogue, cooperation, and mutual respect between both levels of government.

Model Answer:

Right to Privacy

The right to privacy is intrinsic to life and personal liberty, inherently protected under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This interpretation has evolved through judicial pronouncements:

• In R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994), the Supreme Court recognized the right to privacy as part of the right to “life” and “personal liberty” guaranteed under Article 21.

• The landmark judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) conclusively established privacy as a fundamental right, deriving it from Article 21.

• The court held that privacy is essential for the exercise of personal liberty and the preservation of human dignity, thus intrinsically linked to the core of Article 21.

Regarding DNA testing of a child in the womb to establish paternity:

1. Legal Framework:
• No specific legislation governs prenatal paternity testing in India.
• The DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, if passed, may provide some guidelines.

2. Judicial Stance:
• In Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Orissa State Commission for Women (2010), the Supreme Court held that DNA tests should not be ordered routinely, but only when a strong prima facie case is made out.

3. Privacy Concerns:
• Prenatal paternity testing involves the privacy rights of the mother, the unborn child, and the alleged father.
• It raises ethical questions about the child’s right to privacy even before birth.

4. Balancing Rights:
• Courts must balance the right to privacy against the right to know one’s biological parentage.
• The child’s best interests are often given paramount importance in such decisions.

5. Consent and Counseling:
• Informed consent of the mother is crucial for prenatal testing.
• Proper counseling should be provided to all parties involved due to potential psychological impacts.

Conclusion: While privacy is fundamental under Article 21, its application in prenatal paternity testing requires careful legal and ethical consideration.

Model Answer:

The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Bill, 2024

The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Bill, 2024 aims to prevent unfair practices in public examinations conducted by specified authorities. The key aims and objects of the Bill include:

1. Preventing unfair means: The Bill defines and prohibits various unfair practices such as paper leaks, assisting candidates during exams, tampering with computer networks, and conducting fake examinations.

2. Punitive measures: It establishes strict penalties for offenses, including imprisonment of 3-5 years and fines up to Rs 10 lakh for individuals, and up to Rs 1 crore for service providers.

3. Accountability of service providers: The Bill mandates reporting of violations by service providers and imposes severe penalties for non-compliance or direct involvement in offenses.

4. Tackling organized crime: It defines and provides harsher punishments for organized crimes related to public examinations, including imprisonment of 5-10 years and fines of at least Rs 1 crore.

5. Investigative framework: The Bill establishes procedures for inquiry and investigation of offenses, making them cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable.

Scope of examinations covered:

The Bill applies to examinations conducted by specified authorities, including:
– Union Public Service Commission
– Staff Selection Commission
– Railway Recruitment Board
– National Testing Agency
– Institute of Banking Personnel Selection
– Central government departments and attached offices for recruitment

University and State Education Board examinations are not explicitly mentioned in the list of covered examinations. However, the central government has the authority to notify additional examination authorities under the Bill’s purview.

Conclusion: The Bill aims to comprehensively address unfair practices in public examinations through prevention, punishment, and improved accountability.