1. Human Rights Compliance
Introduction:
- The enforcement of human rights norms globally can be approached through economic sanctions, military interventions, or moral pressure.
- While powerful nations may wield economic or military leverage, smaller nations and non-governmental organizations often rely on moral pressure to influence human rights practices.
- Despite state sovereignty posing challenges, moral pressure can occasionally prompt changes in human rights practices.
- However, authoritarian regimes frequently ignore such pressure. The effectiveness of naming and shaming, as well as the broader implications for international human rights compliance, warrant examination.
- Methods of Enforcing Human Rights Compliance:
- Economic Sanctions and Military Intervention: Effective for powerful nations but less feasible for others.
- Moral Pressure: Utilized by NGOs and smaller nations to criticize and pressure governments to improve human rights records.
- Impact of Naming and Shaming:
- Case Studies:
- Myanmar and Ethiopia: Significant pressure led to the release of political prisoners.
- Colombia and Argentina: Policy changes were influenced by naming and shaming.
- Chile, Serbia, Liberia, and Peru: Leaders prosecuted following international censure.
- Benefits: Increased accountability and human rights improvements, enhanced access to justice for marginalized groups.
- Failures: Some governments resist or make only cosmetic changes; notable examples include Israel, China, and Russia.
- Challenges and Limitations:
- International Law Conundrums: Efforts like Amnesty International’s petitions or UN resolutions often face resistance and may not effectuate substantial change.
- Strategic Contexts: Naming and shaming may backfire or have limited impact in cases where economic or military sanctions are ineffective.
- State Sovereignty: Challenges in enforcing global human rights standards due to state sovereignty and political agendas.
- Strategic Approaches:
- Building Human Rights from Within: Focus on internal democratic institutions and national psyche to support human rights.
- Combating Authoritarianism: Encourage reforms and challenge illiberal forces by bolstering liberal ideas and human rights advocacy.
- Role of States: States must prioritize human rights as a binding commitment, ensuring institutions uphold democratic norms and protect individual freedoms.
Conclusion:
The effectiveness of moral pressure and naming and shaming in enforcing human rights varies based on context and the nature of the regime in question.
While these methods can sometimes lead to positive outcomes and reforms, their success is often limited by resistance from powerful or authoritarian governments.
To advance human rights, it is essential to strengthen democratic institutions, foster a national commitment to human rights, and challenge authoritarian ideologies.
A consolidated approach involving both internal and external strategies is crucial for meaningful human rights progress.
Mains Practice Question:
|
Q. Discuss the effectiveness of moral pressure and naming and shaming in enforcing human rights compliance. How do these strategies compare with economic sanctions and military interventions in achieving human rights objectives?
|
2. LGBTQ+ Community : Status and Expextation
After Manifesto Moment, Budgetary Disappointment
Introduction:
The 2024 Union Budget has disappointed the LGBTQ+ community in India, undermining earlier hopes kindled by political manifestos pledging support for LGBTQ+ rights. Despite promises made by various political parties, the budget reflects minimal progress and inadequate funding for essential LGBTQ+ welfare programs.
Body:
- Budget Allocations and Impact:
- Transgender Welfare: The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment’s budget for transgender welfare under the SMILE program increased from ₹52.91 crore in FY24 to ₹68.46 crore in FY25. However, actual expenditure was only ₹22.82 crore in FY24. This underfunding has led to the closure of many Garima Grahas (shelter homes) and minimal functionality of the National Council for Transgender Persons (NCTP).
- National AIDS Control Organisation (NACO): Funding was reduced from ₹3,079.97 crore in FY24 to ₹2,892.00 crore in FY25. This reduction is concerning given India’s substantial HIV epidemic, which affects over 2.4 million people, with significant gaps in treatment and awareness.
- Systematic Denial of Rights:
- Allocation per Transgender Citizen: With an estimated transgender population of around 22 crore, the budgetary allocation amounts to a negligible ₹56 per person. This reflects a broader issue of inadequate resources and support for LGBTQ+ individuals.
- Needs of LGBTQ+ Youth: There is a critical need for safe spaces, inclusive mental health care, and equal access to education and employment to address rising suicide rates and discrimination against LGBTQ+ youth.
- Political and Civil Society Engagement:
- Role of Opposition and Government: Opposition parties must advocate for LGBTQ+ rights in Parliament, while the government must reconcile its manifesto promises with actual budgetary support.
- Historical and Recent Advocacy: The LGBTQ+ movement has seen significant milestones, such as the Namdeo Dhasal march in 1988 and Shabnam Mausi’s election in 1998. Recent state-level successes include Maharashtra’s transgender welfare board and Tamil Nadu’s LGBTQ+ policy.
- Future Directions:
- Civil Society Pressure: Effective implementation of rights requires sustained civil society pressure alongside judicial progress. Collaboration with both Central and State governments is crucial to ensure that rights are not merely on paper but are practiced.
Conclusion:
The 2024 Union Budget’s inadequate allocations for LGBTQ+ welfare and HIV/AIDS prevention highlight a systemic issue of underfunding and lack of genuine support for marginalized communities.
To achieve meaningful progress, political leaders and civil society must work together to bridge the gap between promises and practical support, ensuring that LGBTQ+ rights are effectively upheld and implemented.
Mains Practice Question:
|
Q. Critically evaluate the impact of the 2024 Union Budget on LGBTQ+ welfare and HIV/AIDS prevention in India. How does the budget reflect the government’s commitment to these issues, and what steps should be taken to address the shortcomings? |
3. Imports norms and its impact on Indian Pharma
Introduction:
Ensuring affordable pharmaceuticals is vital for managing healthcare costs in India, where out-of-pocket health expenses were nearly 47.1% of total health expenditure in 2021. Despite initiatives like the Drugs Price Control Order (DPCO), 2013, aimed at regulating drug prices, recent government measures could undermine the domestic pharmaceutical industry by favoring imports over local production.
Body:
- Government Measures and Their Implications:
- Global Tenders for Medicines:
- The Department of Expenditure (DOE) authorized the procurement of 120 medicines through global tenders. This list includes top-selling anti-diabetes and anti-cancer drugs.
- The order specifies certain brands, potentially reinforcing the market monopoly of foreign companies and disincentivizing domestic production.
- Customs Duty Reduction:
- The 2024-25 Union Budget proposed removing the 10-12% customs duty on three cancer medicines from AstraZeneca.
- Although intended to reduce prices, this measure is unlikely to make a significant impact given the high cost of these medicines.
- Impact on Domestic Industry:
- Patent Protection and Regulatory Barriers:
- Many new medicines are under patent protection, limiting the ability of Indian companies to produce affordable generics or biosimilars.
- Stringent regulatory guidelines for biosimilars impose high costs and lengthy approval processes, further hindering domestic producers.
- Proactive Government Action:
- The Patents Act includes provisions to promote local production, such as Section 83, which supports making patented inventions available at reasonable prices.
- Compulsory licenses (CL) can be issued to allow local production of patented medicines, though this has been rarely used.
- Government-use licenses under Section 100 can also facilitate domestic production of generic versions of patented medicines.
- Biosimilar Guidelines:
- Outdated Requirements:
- Current guidelines for biosimilars in India mandate costly and time-consuming animal studies and clinical trials, which are no longer required in many developed countries.
- The International Generic and Biosimilar Medicines Association highlights that reducing duplicative requirements could improve patient access and reduce costs.
- Policy Recommendations:
- Review and Realignment:
- The government should reconsider its recent decisions that favor imports over domestic production.
- Align policies with the Patents Act’s provisions to support local manufacturing and reduce reliance on imports.
- Support for Domestic Industry:
- Reform regulatory guidelines for biosimilars to align with international standards.
- Utilize compulsory and government-use licenses more effectively to make medicines affordable and promote local production.
Conclusion:
The current approach of favouring imports through global tenders and customs duty reductions undermines efforts to support and grow India’s domestic pharmaceutical industry.
To ensure the affordability and availability of medicines, the government must align its policies with existing legal provisions to promote local production, reduce regulatory burdens, and support domestic pharmaceutical companies.
Mains Practice Question:
|
Q. Assess the impact of recent government measures on India’s pharmaceutical industry. How do these measures affect domestic production and what should be done to support local manufacturers?
|
