The Hindu Editorial Newspaper Analysis Free PDF

Table of Contents

Budget session shamed democracy
Opposition for failing to keep the government answerable
MPs proposed that their salaries
Money bills that do not need the Rajya Sabha‟s nod
Lok Sabha Speaker, most glaringly, failed to use the powers at
her command to suspend unruly MPs
 No-confidence motion

The fall of Lula

 Conviction of Brazil‟s former President throws its politics into further disarray
 Hopes to return to power in the October general election

Inclusion and the right to dignity

 Battling discrimination must not fall on the shoulders of Dalits alone
 How many more indignities does the community have to suffer?
 Repair of historical wrongs.
 Opposed the dilution by the Supreme Court, in its order of March 20, 2018, of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
 Violent protests by Dalits in northern India the day before
 Lost confidence in the ability of Indian democracy
 In January 2016 the death of Rohith Vemula
 Historic Bhima Koregaon battle in Maharashtra
 Dalit literary works, Omprakash Valmiki‟s Joothan (2003), Narendra Jadhav‟s
Untouchables (2005), and Baby Kamble‟s The Prisons We Broke (2009)
 Right to respect, has not been realised.

Smoke in the woods

 Forest Policy was last revised in 1988, changes are perhaps overdue.
 New draft Forest Policy 2018, however, ignores the lessons from this period
 India‟s diverse forests support the livelihoods of 250 million people, providing them firewood, fodder, bamboo, beedi leaves and many other products.
 Forest policy, therefore, focusses primarily on which benefits (and beneficiaries) to prioritise, where and through what process.
 Another focus area is to decide when and through what process to allow diversion of forest land for “non-forest” activities such as dam building, mining and agriculture.
 Forest policy in colonial India focussed on maximising products and revenues for the state through the imperial forest department as sole owner, protector and manager of the forest
Unfortunately, post-Independence policy continued this statist approach.
Forests were seen as sources of raw material for industry and local communities were simply treated as labour
Paradigm shift, the 1988 Forest Policy recognised the multiple roles of forests and prioritised environmental stability over revenue maximisation.
Policy emphasised people‟s involvement in protecting and regenerating forests
Joint forest management ( JFM) was initiated in 1990s to implement the concept of people‟s involvement
But what began with great expectations eventually ended up as a nation-wide charade(mockery)
 Forest Rights Act (FRA) of 2006 created a historic opportunity Its community forest resource provisions gave communities rights to both access and manage forests.
 Today, thousands of villages in Maharashtra and Odisha have received these rights, and hundreds have begun to exercise them.
 Adivasis of Niyamgiri in Odisha exercised this provision to prevent bauxite mining
 Does the 2018 Forest Policy draft build on the new direction of 1988 and incorporate
the lessons learnt since then? Unfortunately, the answer is a no
 They will now enter into public private partnerships (PPPs) to bring corporate investment into forest lands
 Entail more such destruction, with even the profits ending up in corporate hands.
 ₹50•,000 crore of NPV monies (CAMPA, or Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management
and Planning Authority, funds) provides the means to achieving this carbon target
 This overlooks the ecological and social implications of carbon and production forestry and
the need for decentralised democracy

A case to withdraw the triple talaq Bill

 The Bill in its current form has many procedural and legal infirmities
 Prime Minister‟s lament to the outgoing Rajya Sabha MPs that they missed out on an
opportunity to debate important issues such as the triple talaq Bill — the Muslim Women
(Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017 due to disruptions is an indication that despite
widespread public opinion against it, Centre is inordinately keen on making it a law
 Supreme Court, in Shayara Bano v. Union Of India (2017),
 Had set aside the validity of instant talaq
 Bill criminalises talaqe-biddat even if it is not followed by eviction or desertion of the wife.
 Imprisonment which may extend to one year,or with a maximum fine of ₹2•,000
 Civil or criminal
 Triple talaq Bill fails the test of constitutionality is found in Article 21
 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978),

Prelims Focus Facts-News Analysis

 Page-1-Pak. plans to permanently ban JuD
 Syria „chemical attack‟ claims 49 lives
 Medical group says more than 500 in Douma have reported breathing issues; Damascus
denies claims