UPSC Key—25th March, 2024: Phone Tapping, Total Fertility Rate and Delisting of the Monuments

• Why Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) wants to delist 18 centrally protected monuments?

• How are monuments protected in India?

• How many centrally protected monuments are there in India?

• How delisting of the monuments-Know its implications

• What is the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958?

• What is a national monument?

• So does India now have fewer protected monuments?

• Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)-Powers, Functions, Role and Mandate

• “Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) failed to act as guardian of India’s heritage” once observed by Supreme Court in the context of Taj Mahal-Do you think that ASI has failed to preserve other monuments and Heritage of India?

• Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)-Significance

• Do you Know-A ‘monument of national importance’, if designated by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), authorises the central government to “maintain, protect and promote the site”, which may be considered of significant historical importance, as mandated by the Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. Currently, there are around 3,600 monuments of national importance being protected by the ASI.

The monuments facing delisting include Kos Minar No.13 at Mujessar village in Haryana; Bara Khamba Cemetery in Delhi; Gunner Burkill’s Tomb at Rangoon in Jhansi; Cemetery at Gaughat in Lucknow; and Telia Nala Buddhist ruins, which form part of a deserted village in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh.

Delisting of the monuments effectively means the central agency won’t have any onus to protect them, and activities related to construction and urbanisation in the area can be carried out in a regular manner.
Currently, the ASI has 3,693 monuments under its purview, which will fall to 3,675 once the delisting exercise is completed in the next few weeks.

According to an official gazette notification dated March 8, published last week, the ASI has invoked Section 35 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act) to delist the 18 monuments, stating that these “have ceased to be of national importance”.

“In exercise of the powers conferred by section 35 of AMASR Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to declare that the monuments specified in the Schedule to this notification have ceased to be of national importance for the purposes of said Act,” the notification said, inviting “objections or suggestions” from the public within two months.

Under the AMASR Act, monuments of national importance are to be conserved and maintained by the ASI as an important site pertaining to history and culture, and any kind of construction-related activity is not allowed around the protected site. On December 8 last year, the Ministry of Culture had told Parliament that 50 of India’s 3,693 centrally protected monuments have gone missing. This submission was made as part of a report titled ‘Issues relating to Untraceable Monuments and Protection of Monuments in India’ submitted to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture.

The missing monuments included 11 in Uttar Pradesh, as well as two each in Delhi and Haryana. It also included monuments in Assam, West Bengal, Arunachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. According to the ASI, which is under the Ministry of Culture, 14 of these 50 monuments were lost to rapid urbanisation, 12 submerged by reservoirs or dams, and 24 remain untraceable.
The 18 monuments to be delisted come from the list of 24 monuments that remain untraceable.

It was in 2013 that the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) had declared 92 monuments as “missing” after a first-of-its-kind physical verification exercise undertaken after Independence. Out of these 92 “missing” monuments, the ASI said, 42 were later identified, while giving the break-up of the remaining 50 monuments under those affected by urbanisation, reservoirs/dams and those which remain untraceable.

The House panel had come down heavily on the distinction regarding the lost monuments as “an academic distinction since monuments lost to urbanisation/reservoirs are also irrecoverable”. The move to delist the 18 monuments comes nearly five months after the parliamentary panel observed that the list of ASI-protected sites includes a large number of “minor monuments” and recommended that it should be “rationalised and categorised” on the basis of their national significance, unique architectural value and specific heritage content.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍Our vanishing monuments

Previous year UPSC Mains Question Covering similar theme:

📍The rock-cut architecture represents one of the most important sources of our knowledge of early Indian art and history. Discuss. (GS 1, 2020)
📍Safeguarding the Indian Art Heritage is the need of the moment. Discuss. (GS 1, 2019)

EXPRESS NETWORK

Telangana phone tapping case: 2 more senior police officers held

Preliminary Examination: Indian Polity and Governance

Main Examination: General Studies II: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

• What’s the ongoing story- Two more senior police officials have been arrested by Hyderabad Police in connection with the case of phone tapping and destroying certain computer systems and official data.

• How are phones tapped in India?

• Who can tap phones?

• What laws govern this?

• Who authorises phone tapping?

• Indian Telegraph Act, 1885-Historical Background and Present Relevance

• Reforms needed or Revoking Indian Telegraph Act 1885?

• Phone Tapping and Indian Telegraph Act, 1885

• Legality of Phone Tapping and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution

• Authenticity of An Intercepted Conversation as an Evidence

• Do You Know-In the era of fixed-line phones, mechanical exchanges would link circuits together to route the audio signal from the call. When exchanges went digital, tapping was done through a computer. Today, when most conversations happen through mobile phones, authorities make a request to the service provider, which is bound by law to record the conversations on the given number and provide these in real time through a connected computer.

In the states, police have the powers to tap phones. At the Centre, 10 agencies are authorised to do so: Intelligence Bureau, CBI, Enforcement Directorate, Narcotics Control Bureau, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, National Investigation Agency, R&AW, Directorate of Signal Intelligence, and the Delhi Police Commissioner. Tapping by any other agency would be considered illegal. Phone tapping in India is governed by the The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

Section 5(2) says that “on the occurrence of any public emergency, or in the interest of the public safety”, phone tapping can be done by the Centre or states if they are satisfied it is necessary in the interest of “public safety”, “sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence”.

There is an exception for the press: “press messages intended to be published in India of correspondents accredited to the Central Government or a State Government shall not be intercepted or detained, unless their transmission has been prohibited under this sub-section”. The competent authority must record reasons for tapping in writing.

Rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph (Amendment) Rules, 2007, says phone tapping orders “shall not be issued except by an order made by the Secretary to the Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs in the case of Government of India and by the Secretary to the State Government in-charge of the Home Department in the case of a State Government”. The order has to conveyed to the service provider in writing; only then can the tapping begin.

In unavoidable circumstances, such an order may be issued by an officer, not below the rank of a Joint Secretary to the Government of India, who has been authorised by the Union Home Secretary, or the State Home Secretary. In remote areas or for operational reasons, if it is not feasible to get prior directions, a call can be intercepted with the prior approval of the head or the second senior-most officer of the authorised law enforcement agency at the central level, and by authorised officers, not below the rank of Inspector General of Police, at the state level.

The order has to be communicated within three days to the competent authority, who has to approve or disapprove it within seven working days. “If the confirmation from the competent authority is not received within the stipulated seven days, such interception shall cease,” the rule says.

For example, during the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai, the authorities had no time to follow the complete procedure, and so a mail was sent to the service provider by the Intelligence Bureau, and phones of terrorists were put under surveillance. “The proper procedure was followed later. Many times, in grave situations such as terror attacks, service providers are approached with even verbal requests, which they honour in the interest of the nation’s security,” an intelligence official said. The law is clear that interception must be ordered only if there is no other way of getting the information.

“While issuing directions under sub-rule (1) the officer shall consider possibility of acquiring the necessary information by other means and the directions under sub-rule (1) shall be issued only when it is not possible to acquire the information by any other reasonable means,” Rule 419A says. The directions for interception remain in force, unless revoked earlier, for a period not exceeding 60 days. They may be renewed, but not beyond a total of 180 days.

Any order issued by the competent authority has to contain reasons, and a copy is to be forwarded to a review committee within seven working days. At the Centre, the committee is headed by the Cabinet Secretary with the Law and Telecom Secretaries as members. In states, it is headed by the Chief Secretary with the Law and Home Secretaries as members.

The committee is expected to meet at least once in two months to review all interception requests. “When the Review Committee is of the opinion that the directions are not in accordance with the provisions referred to above it may set aside the directions and orders for destruction of the copies of the intercepted message or class of messages,” the law says.

Under the rules, records pertaining to such directions shall be destroyed every six months unless these are, or are likely to be, required for functional requirements. Service providers too are required to destroy records pertaining to directions for interception within two months of discontinuance of the interception. There are multiple provisions aimed at keeping the process transparent.

Directions for interception are to specify the name and designation of the officer or the authority to whom the intercepted call is to be disclosed, and also specify that the use of intercepted call shall be subject to provisions of Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act.
The directions have to be conveyed to designated officers of the service providers in writing by an officer not below the rank of SP or Additional SP or equivalent. The officer is expected to maintain records with details of the intercepted call, the person whose message has been intercepted, the authority to whom the intercepted calls have been disclosed, date of destruction of copies etc.

The designated nodal officers of the service providers are supposed to issue acknowledgment letters to the security/law enforcement agency within two hours on receipt of an intimation. They are to forward every 15 days a list of interception authorisations received to the nodal officers of the security and law enforcement agencies for confirmation of authenticity.

“The service providers shall put in place adequate and effective internal checks to ensure that unauthorised interception of messages does not take place and extreme secrecy is maintained…,” the rule says. It makes the service providers responsible for actions of their employees. In case of unauthorised interception, the service provider may be fined or even lose its licence.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍 Explained: The laws for surveillance in India, and concerns over privacy

THE EDITORIAL PAGE

WTO’S EXISTENTIAL CRISIS

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

Mains Examination: General Studies II: Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interest

• What’s the ongoing story-Amidst media hype, the 13th biennial ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ended without significant accomplishment. The WTO member countries could not agree on how to solve several issues staring at the international community. First is whether countries have the right to purchase, stockpile, and distribute food to their citizens in need. Also known as the public stockholding (PSH) programme, while this is the

sovereign right of countries, the WTO rules throw a spanner in the works.

• The 13th biennial ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation (WTO)-Know in detail

• The 13th biennial ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation (WTO)-what are the key takeaways?

• What is the WTO Ministerial Conference?

• The 13th biennial ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ended without significant accomplishment

• What are the issues and challenges undermining the WTO’s Effectiveness?

• India’s issues within the WTO-Know in detail

• For Your Information-One of the central objectives of the WTO is to cut trade-distorting domestic subsidies. There are limits to the subsidies a country can provide, such as minimum support price (MSP). The WTO rules provide that this price support will be assessed using an average price of the base years 1986-88, which is more than three-and-a-half-decades old. It thus becomes challenging for countries like India to pursue PSH programmes using the instrumentality of MSP. This issue is significant as the farmers of Punjab have hit the streets again demanding a legal guarantee to MSP.

While countries agreed upon a peace clause in 2013, which provides some legal immunity to India’s MSP policy, it is insufficient. Conscious of this, India has been negotiating hard for a permanent solution. But the recent ministerial meet came a cropper on this. It seems the US and other agricultural exporting nations, also known as the Cairns group, have, again, succeeded in blocking any meaningful movement on this issue. India must continue striving for the PSH solution. But it will also have to think of new ways to support farmers, such as augmenting existing income support schemes like the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Nidhi that are WTO-compatible.

The next important issue on which the ministerial failed is regulating subsidies given by the industrialised world to their industrial shipping fleets indulging in overcapacity and over-fishing (OCOF). OCOF has led to a substantial depletion of fishing stock posing a grave threat to the marine environment. India has been demanding binding rules to rein in these subsidies, with a transition period for developing countries to implement these rules. But, once again, the richer countries prevailed by ensuring that no rules were adopted.

Another major letdown has been the failure to make any significant headway toward solving the crisis affecting the dispute settlement mechanism (DSM). Hailed as a feather in the WTO’s cap, the DSM has been paralysed since 2019 due to the US blocking the appointment of the members to the Appellate Body (AB) — the second tier of the two-tier DSM. While WTO member countries have reiterated their commitment to having a well-functioning DSM by the end of 2024, the writing on the wall is clear. The US will not allow the restoration of the AB as it existed till 2019. The most significant proof of this is how the developed countries led informal and non-transparent negotiations on dispute settlement last year. Perplexingly, the talks focussed, not on the dysfunctionality of the AB, but on other issues that perhaps don’t need critical attention.

India, one of those demanding the restoration of the body, must understand the US game plan — the de-judicialisation of trade multilateralism. The WTO was created when the neoliberal consensus emerged after the Cold War and the collapse of communism. This period saw not just the legalisation of international relations (countries subjecting themselves to international law) but also its judicialisation (the expansion of international courts and tribunals that dominate decision-making in place of national actors). De-judicialisation, as Daniel Abebe and Tom Ginsburg define it, is the reverse phenomenon where countries weaken international courts to take back decision-making power. This is what the US seems to be doing with the WTO’s dispute settlement. It has wrested control from the AB to unilaterally respond to the geo-economic challenges that a rising China presents.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍India seeks permanent solution to long-pending food stockpile issue at Abu Dhabi WTO meet

EXPLAINED

HOLI IS BECOMING WARMER THAN BEFORE: WHAT A NEW STUDY SAYS

Preliminary Examination: General issues on Environmental ecology, Bio-diversity and Climate Change – that do not require subject specialization.

Mains Examination: General Studies III: Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment.

• What’s the ongoing story- Since 1970, both March and April have become warmer across India, increasing the chances of having unconformable and possibly dangerously hot conditions, according to a study published on Friday. As a result, in some states, there is a higher likelihood of temperatures around Holi to cross 40 degree Celsius — a rare occurrence in the early 1970s.

• Researchers examined daily temperatures from January 1, 1970, to December 31, 2023, for the study-what exactly they
have observed?

• Do You Know-The study found that during March, the northern and western regions of India have warmed up the most, relative to 1970 levels. Jammu and Kashmir showed the greatest increase in average temperature of around 2.8 degree Celsius. For the month of April, warming has been more uniform across India, with Mizoram reporting the greatest increase of roughly 1.9 degree Celsius since 1970.

Focussing on temperatures around Holi, the study observed that in the early 1970s, only three states — Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, and Bihar — had more than a 5% chance of witnessing temperatures above 40 degree Celsius in late March. Currently, this number has shot up to include nine states — including the three original states, and Rajasthan, Gujarat, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, and Andhra Pradesh — with Maharashtra reporting a whopping 14% probability.

The researchers also examined 51 cities across India, and found that 37 of them — almost 73% — now have at least a 1% chance of experiencing 40 degree Celsius or warmer temperatures, and 11 have a 10% or greater probability. Bilaspur now has the highest risk (31%) of crossing 40 degrees, 2.5 times higher than in the 1970s. The findings show that India has been witnessing “an abrupt transition in the temperatures from cool winter-like temperatures to much warmer conditions now,” according to Dr Andrew Pershing, VP for Science, Climate Central. “After the strong warming trend observed in February, March is also likely to follow the same pattern,” he said.

• What’s behind warmer temperatures?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍Warming up to climate change: Is Earth becoming warmer?

Pak’s basmati seed ‘piracy’

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

Mains Examination: 

• General Studies III: Issues relating to intellectual property rights

• General Studies III: Major crops-cropping patterns in various parts of the country

• What’s the ongoing story- Scientists at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) and exporters have red-flagged the “illegal” cultivation of its improved basmati rice varieties in Pakistan. The issue came to the fore after the emergence of promotional YouTube videos, featuring recently-released IARI varieties, by Pakistani seed firms in places such as Multan, Bahawalnagar and Hafizabad.

• How have India’s basmati exports fared of late?

• What exactly is the ‘neighbourhood threat’ that’s being talked about?

• What is so special about the IARI-bred varieties?

• Is this concerning?

• What should India do?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍India’s ‘protected’ basmati varieties renamed & cultivated in Pak, IARI demands legal action

1.29 by 2050: impact of India’s falling fertility rate

Preliminary Examination: Economic and Social Development

Mains Examination: General Studies I: Population and associated issues

• What’s the ongoing story- By 2050, one in five Indians will be a senior citizen while there will be fewer younger people to take care of them. This predictive scenario has been highlighted by a Lancet study, which says that India’s total fertility rate (TFR) — the average number of children born per woman — is dipping irreversibly to 1.29, far lower than the replacement rate of 2.1. This means a rapidly depleting working age population.

• Why fertility went down in India?

• What are long-term consequences?

• Is it declining worldwide?

• What is Total Fertility Rate (TFR)?

• What does Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of 2.0 mean?

• What is Replacement Fertility Rate?

• How is the Total Fertility Rate calculated?

• What is the difference between birth rate and Total Fertility Rate (TFR)?

• Does an increase in births mean that TFR will go up?

• What is demographic dividend?

• Family Planning in India-Issues and Challenges

• Population growth brings what sort of challenges for Indian public policy?

• Do you think that massive growth in population in India is blessing in disguise?

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍Behind population numbers

For any queries and feedback, contact priya.shukla@indianexpress.com
The Indian Express UPSC Key is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with the latest Updates.