The Hindu Editorial Discussion is crucial for UPSC CSE preparation, offering in-depth analysis of current affairs, government policies, and socio-economic issues. It enhances critical thinking, answer-writing skills, and interview preparation by providing diverse perspectives on national and international developments. Regular editorial reading helps aspirants develop a balanced viewpoint, improving their essay writing and General Studies papers.
1. Not business as usual: On upholding India’s reputation for quality drugs
India, known as the “pharmacy of the global South,” is facing a crisis of reputation due to recent incidents involving substandard drugs. Cases of contaminated cough syrups and eye drops have raised global concerns about the safety and regulatory oversight of Indian pharmaceutical exports.
Recent Controversies and Regulatory Concerns:
Indian pharmaceutical companies have been under scrutiny due to multiple incidents:
(i) Contaminated cough syrups caused fatalities in Gambia (2022), Uzbekistan (2022), and Cameroon (2023).
(ii) Drug-resistant bacteria in India-made eye drops led to deaths and blindness in the U.S. (2023).
(iii) BBC’s investigation exposed Maharashtra-based Aveo Pharmaceuticals for illegally manufacturing and exporting highly addictive opioid drug combinations to West Africa.
The company was producing a combination of tapentadol (opioid) and carisoprodol (muscle relaxant), which lacked Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) approval. Even if approved by a State drug authority, it remains illegal without CDSCO’s clearance.
Regulatory Response and Way Forward:
While India initially denied WHO’s findings on toxic cough syrups, regulators swiftly acted in this case due to video evidence from the BBC. Actions taken include:
(i) Seizure of 13 million drugs and 26 batches of active pharmaceutical ingredients.
(ii) Issuance of a ‘stop activity’ order and revocation of manufacturing and export licenses.
(iii) Show cause notice to the company.
Conclusion:
Indian pharmaceutical companies have earned a reputation for producing high-quality generic drugs, but such incidents threaten global trust. Strict enforcement, stringent penalties, and regulatory vigilance are essential to ensure that India remains known for safe and affordable medicines, not for illicit synthetic opioids.
2. New direction: On the German poll results, Russia relations
Germany’s recent elections have brought significant political shifts amid economic struggles and rising far-right influence. With the collapse of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s coalition, the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), led by Friedrich Merz, has emerged as the largest bloc. The election outcome is expected to shape Germany’s economic recovery and foreign policy, particularly regarding Russia and the Ukraine war.
Election Results and Political Landscape:
(i) CDU and Christian Social Union (CSU) secured 28.5% votes, emerging as the largest bloc.
(ii) Far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) surged to 20.8%, doubling its previous vote share.
(iii) Social Democratic Party (SPD) suffered a major setback with 16.1%, one of its worst performances since the 19th century.
(iv) The Greens got 11.6%, while Die Linke rose to 8.8%.
Despite CDU’s lead, coalition formation remains complex. With 208 seats, CDU is expected to form a coalition with SPD (120 seats), securing a majority in the 630-member Bundestag.
Challenges Ahead:
Mr. Merz’s leadership comes at a time when Germany is facing economic contraction, deindustrialization, and rising anti-immigrant sentiment. Key issues include:
(i) Economic Revival – Germany’s economy has struggled since COVID-19, worsened by the loss of cheap Russian gas due to Western sanctions.
(ii) Immigration and Far-Right Surge – The AfD capitalized on public discontent, posing a long-term political challenge.
(iii) Foreign Policy and Russia – Germany’s sanctions on Russia have led to economic instability. A new strategic approach is needed to balance European security and economic interests.
Way Forward:
Mr. Merz must focus on rebuilding the economy and redefining Germany’s Russia policy. A pragmatic approach, inspired by the U.S. reset with Russia, could help secure a quick and just resolution to the Ukraine war while ensuring Europe’s long-term stability. A peaceful and economically strong Europe is essential for Germany’s leadership on the continent.
3. The UGC’s mandate is to elevate, not strangulate
The University Grants Commission (UGC) has once again sparked controversy, with States opposing its directive on the appointment of vice chancellors. The governments of Kerala and Tamil Nadu argue that the directive encroaches on State rights, particularly in giving Governors a greater role in university appointments. While concerns over federalism are valid, the broader issue lies in the UGC’s regulatory overreach, which has stifled innovation and autonomy in higher education.
Key Issues in the UGC’s Role:
(i) Centralized Control vs. State Autonomy – The ongoing debate over vice chancellor appointments highlights a larger power struggle between State governments and the Centre. Given that States bear a significant financial burden in running universities, their demand for greater control is justified.
(ii) Expanding Vice Chancellor Eligibility – The UGC’s move to allow non-academics with distinguished careers in fields like industry and public service to become vice chancellors is a rare progressive step. This practice is common in leading global institutions, including Oxford and Cambridge.
(iii) Failure in Raising Academic Standards – While the UGC enforces uniform rules across universities, it has failed to elevate educational quality. Concerns over poor graduate preparedness, declining research standards, and excessive focus on procedural matters rather than academic excellence remain unaddressed.
The Need for Reform:
India’s universities, once centers of groundbreaking research by scholars like Satyen Bose and S. Chandrashekar, now struggle due to over-regulation and political interference. Micro-management by the UGC has constrained faculty autonomy and innovation, turning universities into compliance-driven institutions rather than knowledge hubs.
Way Forward:
The UGC must shift its focus from bureaucratic control to academic empowerment. Higher education policy should prioritize:
(i) Research excellence to compete globally in knowledge production.
(ii) Institutional autonomy to foster innovation and faculty accountability.
(iii) Balanced governance, ensuring both State and academic independence in decision-making.
Without structural reforms, Indian universities risk further decline, failing to contribute meaningfully to global advancements in education and technology.
4. The RTI is now the ‘right to deny information’
The Right to Information (RTI) Act was introduced with the vision of empowering citizens by granting them access to government information. It was seen as a tool to curb corruption and ensure transparency, making citizens the true monitors of governance. However, over time, the effectiveness of the RTI Act has been significantly weakened, transforming it into a mechanism that often denies rather than grants information.
Erosion of the RTI Act
Initially, the RTI Act was perceived as a shift in power from public servants to the citizens. Attempts to amend and weaken the Act were resisted by strong public protests. However, the government and bureaucracy found indirect ways to dilute its impact.
(A) Inefficient Information Commissions:
(i)Information Commissions, meant to be the final appellate authority, were largely staffed with retired bureaucrats who resisted the idea of citizens exercising power over governance.
(ii) Case disposals were slow, with a backlog extending over a year, rendering information requests ineffective.
(iii) The reluctance to impose penalties further weakened the law’s enforcement.
(B) Judicial Interpretation and Dilution:
(i) The Supreme Court ruling in CBSE & Anr. vs Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) marked a turning point, suggesting that indiscriminate RTI requests could hinder administration.
(ii) This verdict provided a justification for treating RTI users as obstacles to governance.
(C) Redefining ‘Personal Information’:
(i) The Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs Central Information Commission (2012) case set a precedent where personal details of public servants were denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
(ii) The ruling ignored the proviso that states information accessible to Parliament should be accessible to citizens, thereby restricting access to critical public records.
(iii) This decision has since been used in multiple judgments, effectively turning RTI into the “Right to Deny Information.”
Current Challenges and the Role of Citizens
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act has further amended the RTI Act, reinforcing bureaucratic resistance to transparency. Unless citizens and the media actively defend the original intent of the Act, the fundamental right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution will continue to be eroded.
The RTI Act was meant to be a tool for empowerment, but judicial interpretations and bureaucratic resistance have weakened its impact. For it to remain an effective instrument of democracy, there is an urgent need for public discourse, awareness, and collective action.
5. Fencing out interfaith relationships in the new India
The implementation of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in Uttarakhand, coupled with existing anti-conversion laws, is raising concerns about individual rights and religious freedom in India. While proponents argue that the UCC promotes gender justice and uniformity, its provisions, when viewed alongside anti-conversion laws, create significant barriers for interfaith relationships. These legal measures regulate not just marriages but also informal relationships, reinforcing state oversight and social segregation.
Legal Barriers to Interfaith Relationships
Interfaith marriages in India already face social and legal hurdles. According to a 2014 survey, only about 5% of urban respondents had a family member who married outside their religion. The Special Marriage Act, 1954, requires a 30-day notice period, subjecting couples to public scrutiny. Additionally, anti-conversion laws in States like Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Rajasthan impose mandatory declarations, waiting periods, and district magistrate approvals, making conversion for marriage extremely difficult.
These laws also embolden vigilante groups, often linked to right-wing organizations, leading to harassment and violence against interfaith couples. A report found that 63 out of 101 complaints invoking Uttar Pradesh’s anti-conversion law against Christians were filed by third-party groups rather than the individuals involved. Instead of protecting individual freedoms, such laws create legal cover for extrajudicial interventions, often with police complicity.
Impact of UCC on Personal Relationships
The UCC extends state scrutiny to live-in relationships, requiring mandatory registration with district authorities. Couples must submit a 16-page application, provide official documentation, and obtain approval from religious or community leaders. Additionally, families must be notified, making it nearly impossible for couples, particularly interfaith ones, to maintain privacy. Failure to comply results in penalties, including imprisonment of up to six months and a fine of ₹25,000.
This has led to increased surveillance and intervention in private relationships. Reports indicate that only one live-in couple has successfully registered their relationship in Uttarakhand, while many others have sought legal protection from the High Court. The involvement of vigilante groups, who claim to have access to live-in relationship applications, further highlights the risk of targeted harassment.
Institutionalizing Social Segregation
The combined effect of the UCC and anti-conversion laws creates a legal framework that:
A. Strengthens traditional religious institutions – By requiring religious certification for conversions and relationships, these laws reinforce the authority of religious leaders over personal choices, undermining secular values.
B. Increases familial control over women – The notification requirements expose women in interfaith relationships to coercion, honor-based violence, and patriarchal restrictions.
C. Enables vigilantism – Legal provisions provide justification for right-wing groups to monitor and interfere in interfaith relationships under the guise of protecting cultural and religious traditions.
A Broader Trend of Restrictive Laws
The Uttarakhand UCC could serve as a model for other States. Rajasthan’s High Court has proposed similar registration requirements for live-in relationships, while Gujarat is considering drafting its own UCC. The increasing adoption of these legal frameworks signals a move toward greater regulation of personal relationships, raising concerns about religious and social segregation.
Conclusion
The UCC and anti-conversion laws collectively threaten India’s pluralistic social fabric by imposing legal barriers on interfaith relationships. These measures not only infringe upon personal freedoms but also institutionalize religious divisions. In a diverse democracy, personal choices in matters of faith and love should be protected rather than restricted by the State.
Disclaimer:
This analysis is based on the editorial content published in The Hindu and is intended solely for informational and educational purposes. The views, opinions, and interpretations expressed herein are those of the author of original article. Readers are encouraged to refer to the original article for complete context and to exercise their own judgment while interpreting the analysis. The analysis does not constitute professional advice or endorsement of any political, economic, or social perspective.
Follow Fusion IAS