ECI asking Rahul Gandhi to submit complaint on Karnataka roll manipulation under oath infructuous in this situation: experts
The experts opine that the rule quoted by the Karnataka Chief Electoral Officer and subsequently CEOs of Maharashtra and Haryana asking the Leader of the Opposition to submit his complaint and evidence regarding it under an oath or declaration has no application to the present case and is valid only if any complaint is filed within 30 days of the publication of draft Electoral Rolls before elections.
Also read: Congress protest over 'vote theft' in Karnataka updates
Mr. Gandhi claimed in a press conference on Friday (August 7, 2025) that 1,00,250 'fake votes' were created in the Mahadevapura Assembly seat under the Bangalore Central Lok Sabha constituency in Karnataka in order to ensure a win for the BJP.
Following this, the Karnataka Chief Electoral Officer had issued a letter to the Congress leader asking him to submit the evidence under oath under Rule 20 (3) (b) of the Registration of Electors Rules 1960.
The rule says that 'the registration officer shall hold a summary inquiry into every claim or objection in respect of which notice has been given under rule 19 and shall record his decision thereon'.
'The registration officer may in his discretion (a) require any claimant, objector or person objected to, to appear in person before him; (b) require that the evidence tendered by any person shall be given on oath and administer an oath for the purpose'.
According to Constitution Law expert P.D.T. Achary, 'These rules do not apply in this situation. These rules apply till 30 days after draft rolls are published'.
'In this case elections were held 15 months back (Lok Sabha polls 2024) and the Congress party has investigated the entire issue on its own now. These rules have no application whatsoever to the present case,' he said, adding, 'they (ECI) are wrong to invoke this rule.'
Concurring with him, former Chief Election Commissioner O. P. Rawat told The Hindu that the rule quoted by the ECI is more applicable in cases like the Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls, which is currently on in Bihar.
Senior lawyer Kapil Sibal said asking Mr. Gandhi to file the affidavit was 'a joke' since no inquiry can take place under the rule now.
'They are asking for affidavit to be filed and under a rule in which no inquiry can take place. It is a joke in itself. They will go to the people saying that Rahul Gandhi has been asked to submit an affidavit, but will not tell that no action can be taken under the said rule,' he said.
According to Mr. Achary, since the ECI is a constitutional body entrusted with the preparation of Electoral Rolls under Article 324, it should be the duty of the poll body to enquire into allegations regarding serious frauds.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
UPSC Key: Open Book Exam, Sports Governance Bill and Wastewater Surveillance
Important topics and their relevance in UPSC CSE exam for August 13, 2025. If you missed the August 12, 2025, UPSC CSE exam key from the Indian Express, read it here. Syllabus: Preliminary Examination: Indian Polity and Governance – Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues. Mains Examination: General Studies-II: Constitution of India —historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure. What's the ongoing story: The Supreme Court on Monday said inclusion of a citizen oг exclusion of a non-citizen from the voters' list was well within the Election Commission's powers. Key Points to Ponder: — Who is a citizen in India? — What are the constitutional provisions providing for citizenship? — According to the ECI, which documents are considered conclusive proof of citizenship in the ongoing SIR in Bihar? — What does the Aadhaar Act tell about the citizenship of a person holding it? — What are the issues in including Aadhaar and Ration card as a document for approving citizenship? — Is the name in the electoral roll automatically qualifies the person for citizenship? Key Takeaways: — The court also agreed with the EC's view that Aadhaar and voter card can't be conclusive proof of citizenship in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar and would need further verification. — Hearing petitions challenging the SIR, Justice Surya Kant, presiding over a two-Judge bench, said the litigation 'largely' seemed to be 'a case of trust deficiency'. — The top court said that self-declaration of citizenship may lead to legal complications and added that the ECI can verify their authenticity. — Justice Kant pointed out that it's not the ECI but the Aadhaar Act which says that the unique identification number is not proof of citizenship. — Activist and psephologist Yogendra Yadav, who also addressed the court, said, 'This is the first revision exercise in the whole country where there is zero addition and there are only omissions.' — He said Bihar has an adult population of 8.18 crore and that when there should have been more voters, 65 lakhs have been excluded. — Yadav contended that mass disenfranchisement has already taken place, adding that it did not happen due to the failure of the SIR but that the process was designed for the purpose. Do You Know: — In a separate ruling, the Bombay High Court said on Tuesday (12th August) that a person does not become a citizen of India merely by possessing documents like Aadhaar card, PAN card or a voter ID, while refusing bail to a man, allegedly from Bangladesh, for entering India illegally. — The Constitution of India came into effect on January 26, 1950. However, it's worth noting that the sections regarding citizenship were only put into effect on the day of the Constitution's adoption, which was November 29, 1949. — Although the term citizenship is not explicitly defined in the Constitution, Articles 5-11 outline the framework for citizenship at the time of the Constitution's commencement. — These provisions delineate the methods of acquiring citizenship, such as birth, domicile, and descent, as well as circumstances that disqualify individuals from obtaining Indian citizenship. — Article 5 specifically addresses citizenship at the outset of the Constitution. It establishes a dual requirement for granting citizenship, which includes being 'domiciled' in India and meeting one of three criteria. — These are — being born in Indian territory, having at least one parent born in Indian territory, or being a resident of Indian territory for a minimum of five consecutive years preceding the Constitution's commencement. Other Important Articles Covering the same topic: 📍How citizenship was decided by makers of Indian Constitution 📍Yogendra Yadav, Rahul Shastri write on SIR: In Bihar, the edge of disenfranchisement Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme: (1) With reference to India, consider the following statements: (UPSC CSE 2021) 1. There is only one citizenship and one domicile. 2. A citizen by birth only can become the Head of State. 3. A foreigner once granted the citizenship cannot be deprived of it under any circumstances. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 2 and 3 only Syllabus: Preliminary Examination: Indian Polity and Governance-Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues, etc. Mains Examination: General Studies II: Indian Constitution, significant provisions and basic structure, Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary. What's the ongoing story: Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla announced Tuesday that he has accepted a resolution signed by 146 MPs across parties seeking the removal of Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court — who is facing allegations of 'corruption' following the recovery of half-burnt wads of currency notes at his official residence — and set up a three-member committee to probe the charges against him. Key Points to Ponder: — What are the constitutional provisions related to the judiciary? — What are the powers and functions of High Court judges? — What is impeachment? — What are the constitutional provisions and procedures governing the impeachment of High Court judges? — What are the grounds for impeachment of judges? — What is the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968, and what are its key provisions? — What Article 218 of the Constitution of India says? — What role do parliamentary Houses and presiding officers play in the impeachment of High court judges? Key Takeaways: — The committee comprises Supreme Court's Justice Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Karnataka High Court senior advocate B V Acharya. Birla said the committee will present its report as soon as possible. The report will form the basis of debate and voting in Parliament on Justice Varma's impeachment. — The Judges Inquiry Act 1968 deals with the process for removal of a judge of a constitutional court. — Reading out the resolution, Birla said, 'This House resolves that a petition be presented to the President for the removal of Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court from his office for the following misconduct.' — Quoting from the resolution, Birla stated, 'Impeccable character and financial/ intellectual integrity are the foundation of the trust placed by a common man in the judiciary. And that the facts of the present case which point to corruption are violative of the tenets of Article 124, Articles 217 and 218 of the Constitution of India and deserve due process and scrutiny.' — Birla said, 'Finding this proposal to be in accordance with the rules, I have approved it. In accordance with sub-section 2 of section 3 of the Judges (Judges) Act, 1968, I have constituted a committee consisting of the following 3 members to examine the grounds of request for removal of Justice Yashwant Verma from the post.' Do You Know: — The Constitution states that a judge of a constitutional court can only be removed on two grounds: proved 'misbehaviour' and 'incapacity'. The procedure to be followed for removal is laid down in the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968. — Once a motion for impeachment is adopted by either House, the Speaker/ Chairman has to constitute a three-member committee of inquiry. The committee is headed by the Chief Justice of India or a judge of the Supreme Court, and has a Chief Justice of any High Court, and a person who is in the opinion of the Speaker/ Chairman, a 'distinguished jurist'. — For an impeachment motion against an SC or HC judge to go through, at least two-thirds of those 'present and voting' in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha must vote in favour of removing the judge — and the number of votes in favour must be more than 50% of the 'total membership' of each House. If Parliament passes such a vote, the President will pass an order for the removal of the judge. — The process of impeachment of a judge of the Supreme Court is laid down in Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India. Article 218 says the same provisions shall apply in relation to a judge of the High Court as well. Other Important Articles Covering the same topic: 📍Impeachment of judges 📍145 LS, 63 RS MPs submit notices for Justice Varma impeachment Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme: (2) Consider the following statements: (UPSC CSE 2020) 1. The motion to impeach a Judge of the Supreme Court of India cannot be rejected by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha as per the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968. 2. The Constitution of India defines and gives details or what constitutes 'incapacity and proved misbehaviour' of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India. 3. The details of the process of impeachment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India is given in 4 the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. 4. If the motion for the impeachment of a Judge is taken up for voting, the law requires the motion to be backed by each House of the Parliament and supported by a majority of total membership of that House and by not less than two-thirds of total members of that House present and voting. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 and 2 (b) 3 only (c) 3 and 4 only (d) 1, 3 and 4 Syllabus: Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance. Mains Examination: General Studies-II: Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources. What's the ongoing story: A key public health tool that is crucial to monitor infectious diseases, and identify outbreak trends early, is being strengthened to cover more areas and identify more infections. Key Points to Ponder: — What is wastewater surveillance? — Why is it important? — What is antimicrobial resistance? — Why is wastewater surveillance important for antimicrobial resistance? — What is the difference between antimicrobial and antibiotic resistance? Key Takeaways: — Wastewater surveillance, which is currently used for polio and Covid-19, is now being deployed to monitor more commonly reported symptoms caused by several pathogens, such as fever, diarrhoea, acute encephalitis syndrome (inflammation of the brain), and respiratory distress. — Such an expansion has significant public health implications since it is being done with the aim of detecting potential outbreaks early, as well as identifying unusual patterns that may indicate a public health concern. — The surveillance will also study patterns of antimicrobial resistance — a global public health threat — that results in the drugs becoming less effective, making it difficult to treat infections. — At present, tracking changes in the susceptibility of different pathogens to available antimicrobials is being done through a network of 60 hospitals across the country. — While antimicrobial resistance surveillance through a hospital network can provide important trends on which drug continues to work for which disease, it cannot track resistance patterns in the community. Wastewater surveillance, on the other hand, can capture these patterns — even in those who might not go to a hospital for treatment. — The enhanced surveillance will be carried out through the ICMR's (Indian Council of Medical Research) flagship national network of Viral Research and Diagnostic Laboratories: specialised facilities that focus on the diagnosis, research and surveillance of viral diseases. — Wastewater surveillance proved to be an effective tool in tracking Covid-19. A study from Mumbai shows that the pathogen was detected in wastewater up to three weeks before clinical diagnosis of cases. — Another study from Pune showed that silent waves of Covid-19 after the Omicron wave could be detected in wastewater. The XBB variant was detected 130–253 days before it was clinically identified in patients. Do You Know: — Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a condition in which bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites no longer respond to antimicrobial medicines, which include antibiotics, antivirals, antifungals and antiparasitics. — As a result, infections become difficult or impossible to treat, increasing the risk of disease spread, severe illness, disability and death. It is the result of evolution of microbes in a situation where there is a misuse or overuse of antibiotics. — According to World Health Organisation- Antibiotic resistance occurs when bacteria change in response to the use of antibiotics. Bacteria, not humans, become antibiotic resistant. These bacteria may then infect humans and are harder to treat than non-resistant bacteria. — Antimicrobial resistance is a broader term, encompassing resistance to drugs to treat infections caused by other microbes as well, such as parasites (e.g. malaria), viruses (e.g. HIV) and fungi (e.g. Candida). — According to WHO— ' Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the top global public health and development threats. It is estimated that bacterial AMR was directly responsible for 1.27 million global deaths in 2019 and contributed to 4.95 million deaths.' Other Important Articles Covering the same topic: 📍What is anti-microbial resistance (AMR) and why is it a grave threat? 📍UPSC Issue at a Glance | Antimicrobial Resistance and India Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme: (3) Which of the following are the reasons for the occurrence of multi-drug resistance in microbial pathogens in India? (UPSC CSE 2019) 1. Genetic predisposition of some people 2. Taking incorrect doses of antibiotics to cure diseases 3. Using antibiotics in livestock farming 4. Multiple chronic diseases in some people Select the correct answer using the code given below. (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 1, 3 and 4 only (d) 2, 3 and 4 only Previous year UPSC Mains Question Covering similar theme: Can overuse and free availability of antibiotics without Doctor's prescription, be contributors to the emergence of drug-resistant diseasesin India? What are the available mechanisms for monitoring and control? Critically discuss the various issues involved. (UPSC CSE 2014) Syllabus: Preliminary Examination: Indian Polity and Governance-Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues, etc. Mains Examination: General Studies II: Indian Constitution, Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary. What's the ongoing story: The Chief Justice of India is not superior to other judges of the Supreme Court and exercises the same judicial powers as the rest, Chief Justice B R Gavai said on Tuesday. Key Points to Ponder: — Appointment to the office of the Chief Justice of India—What you know about the same. — How is the seniority of judges in the Supreme Court decided? — What are the qualifications required for a person to be appointed as the Chief Justice of India? — What are the constitutional provisions to safeguard and ensure the independent and impartial functioning of a Judge? — Jurisdiction and powers of Chief Justice of India-Know in detail. Key Takeaways: — The CJI made the observation as a three-judge bench, presided by him and comprising Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria, took up an application by the Enforcement Directorate for recall of the court's April 26, 2023 judgment in Ritu Chhabaria vs. Union of India & Ors case. — A two-judge bench of Justices (retired) Krishna Murari and C T Ravikumar it its 2023 judgment deprecated the 'practice' of investigating agencies filing chargesheet in court even before completion of probe so as to deny default bail to accused, and said that even in such cases the right of the accused to default bail will not be extinguished. — As per the law, the chargesheet has to be filed within 60 days from the date of arrest of the accused in cases triable by lower courts and 90 days in cases triable by a sessions court. Failure to file the chargesheet within this period entitles an accused to default bail. — Days after the April 26 ruling, the ED approached the SC and told a bench presided by then CJI D Y Chandrachud that the Delhi High Court had granted bail to the accused in a case probed by it based on the SC judgment in the Ritu Chhabaria case. The agency pointed out that the decision will have nationwide repercussions. By order dated May 12, 2023, the SC suspended the operation of the April 26 judgment. — On Tuesday, CJI Gavai expressed his displeasure over the one-judge bench, even if that be the CJI-headed bench, hearing appeals against judgements of any other bench of the SC. — 'The Chief Justice of India is not superior to the other judges. He is the first among the others. The CJI exercises the same judicial powers as all other judges of this court,' the CJI said. Do You Know: — The Chief Justice of India and the other judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President under clause (2) of Article 124 of the Indian Constitution. It is mentioned in Article 124 that appointment by the President is to be done 'after consultation' with judges of the Supreme Court, as the President may 'deem necessary'. Other Important Articles Covering the same topic: 📍 How is India's top judge chosen? 📍How is seniority decided in the SC? Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme: (4) What is the provision to safeguard the autonomy of the Supreme Court of India? (UPSC CSE 2012) 1. While appointing the Supreme Court Judges, the President of India has to consult the Chief Justice of India. 2. The Supreme Court Judges can be removed by the Chief Justice of India only. 3. The salaries of the Judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India to which the legislature does not have to vote. 4. All appointments of officers and staffs of the Supreme Court of India are made by the Government only after consulting the Chief Justice of India. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 and 3 only (b) 3 and 4 only (c) 4 only (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4 Previous year UPSC Mains Question Covering similar theme: Critically examine the Supreme Court's judgement on 'National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014' with reference to appointment of judges of higher judiciary in India. (UPSC CSE 2017) Syllabus: Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance. Mains 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: The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) will introduce open-book assessments (OBE) in Class 9 from 2026-27, after a pilot study showed strong 'teacher support' for the idea. Key Points to Ponder: — What are open-book exams? — What is the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020? — What is the history of the open-book examination format worldwide? — Is the open-book examination a new concept in India? — What are the benefits of OBE? — What are the concerns associated with OBE? — Know in detail about the educational reforms in India? — What are the constitutional provisions related to Education? Key Takeaways: — The CBSE Governing Body cleared the plan in June. Held in November-December 2023, the pilot was conducted for English, Mathematics and Science in Classes 9 and 10, and for English, Mathematics and Biology in Classes 11 and 12. The move has put the spotlight on OBEs and the debate over their place in India's classrooms. — An open-book exam allows students to use approved resources like textbooks, class notes, or other specified material during an assessment, rather than mainly testing memory. — The challenge lies in knowing where to look, making sense of the material, and applying it to the problem at hand. In a science paper, for instance, the facts might be in front of you, but the real test is linking them together to reach a conclusion. These exams evaluate whether students can interpret ideas effectively, instead of just repeating them. — Open-book exams have been around for decades. In fact, Hong Kong introduced them as early as 1953. — Despite early experiments, OBEs remain rare in high-stakes school exams. Most secondary boards and standardised tests — such as the UK's GCSEs or the US SATs — still require closed-book answers. — The Covid-19 pandemic changed that temporarily. As universities shifted online, many introduced open-book, open-note or even open-web exams. Many students struggled initially — not because of the subject matter, but because they were not familiar with the format. — The open-book examination is not a new concept in India. In 2014, CBSE launched the Open Text-Based Assessment (OTBA) to steer students away from rote learning. It applied to Class 9 for Hindi, English, Mathematics, Science and Social Science, and to Class 11 final exams for subjects like Economics, Biology and Geography. Students were given reference material four months in advance. — But by 2017-18, CBSE dropped the initiative, concluding it had not succeeded in developing the 'critical abilities' it was meant to promote. — The CBSE approval to the OBE is part of a larger shift in the way schools approach assessment. While the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 does not name open-book tests, it calls for moving away from rote memorisation and towards competency-based learning. The goal is for students to grasp concepts, understand processes, and explain how they apply them. Do You Know: — Open-book formats have a stronger presence in collegiate education. The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) approved their use in engineering colleges in 2019 after an expert panel's recommendation. During the pandemic, Delhi University, Jamia Millia Islamia, Jawaharlal Nehru University and Aligarh Muslim University used OBEs, while IIT Delhi, IIT Indore and IIT Bombay ran them online. — Delhi University's first OBE took place in August 2020; the last was in March 2022. The university returned to physical exams in January 2022 but allowed one more round for students admitted in November 2021. — More recently, Kerala's higher education reforms commission has proposed using the format only for internal or practical exams. Other Important Articles Covering the same topic: 📍Best of Both Sides: With open book exams, Indian students will benefit from ancient wisdom, modern pedagogy 📍Before open book exams, teach students to think Previous year UPSC Prelims/Mains Question Covering similar theme: (5) Which of the following provisions of the Constitution does India have a bearing on Education? (UPSC CSE 2012) 1. Directive Principles of State Policy 2. Rural and Urban Local Bodies 3. Fifth Schedule 4. Sixth Schedule 5. Seventh Schedule Select the correct answer using the codes given below: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 3, 4 and 5 only (c) 1, 2 and 5 only (d) 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Syllabus: Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance. Mains 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: Rajya Sabha cleared the National Sports Governance Bill, 2025, on Tuesday, a day after its passage in Lok Sabha. Key Points to Ponder: — What was the need for passing the National Sports Governance Bill? — Why is the BCCI excluded from the RTI Act under this new Bill? — Is BCCI a public authority? — Which committee was formed for reform in the BCCI? — What are the issues related to transparency in the BCCI? — What are the other Bills passed by the Parliament in this Monsoon session? Key Takeaways: — Under the provisions of the Bill, only a sports body that receives financial assistance from the state qualifies as a 'public authority' under the Right to Information Act, 2005. This effectively excludes the BCCI because it does not receive any direct financial aid from the government. — The proposed law will provide for the recognition of national sports bodies and regulate their functioning, and will align sports governance in India with the Olympic and Paralympic Charters, and with international best practices. — The aim is to bring transparency and accountability in national sports federations, and open up hosting, collaboration, and funding opportunities. Since cricket will soon be an Olympic sport, it is necessary for the government to also bring BCCI under the proposed law. — A subsequent amendment to the draft, however, said that a recognised sports organisation 'receiving grants or any other financial assistance' from the government shall be considered a public authority only 'with respect to utilisation of such grants or any other financial assistance'. — The BCCI has for long argued that it is a private, autonomous body and not a 'public authority'. Indeed, it is not a sports federation under the Union Sports Ministry; legally, it is an autonomous charitable society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. — In its 275th Report (2018) titled 'Legal Framework: BCCI vis-à-vis Right to Information Act, 2005', the Law Commission of India recommended that BCCI should be classified as a public authority, pointing to the significant indirect financial assistance it had received from the government over the years. — The Report noted that between 1997 and 2007, the board had received tax exemptions to the tune of more than Rs 2,100 crore due to its legal status as a charitable institution. The foregoing of this revenue amounted to indirect funding for the board, the Commission argued. — The report also cited examples of state governments providing land to state cricket associations at highly subsidised rates; for example, in Himachal Pradesh, the land for a stadium was reportedly leased for Re 1 per month. — The Supreme Court has noted that the BCCI performs 'public functions' that are akin to those of a state body. In a 2015 judgment, the court noted that it selects the teams that represent India, uses national colours and symbols, and exercises a monopoly over the sport with the 'tacit concurrence' of the government. — A committee led by Justice R M Lodha, which was appointed by the Supreme Court in 2015 to recommend reforms in cricket, described the functioning of the BCCI as a 'closed door and back-room affair', and said that the 'legislature must seriously consider bringing BCCI within the purview of the RTI Act'. — Bringing the BCCI under the RTI Act would mean that any citizen of India could seek information covering not just financial matters, but the entire gamut of the board's operations. — The public would be able to demand information on the criteria for team selection, details of contracts awarded for broadcasting and infrastructure, the process of appointment of officials and coaches, and the minutes of BCCI meetings. This would force the board to justify its decisions to the public at large, and not just to its constituent members. Do You Know: — Parliament on Tuesday also passed a new income tax Bill to replace the six-decade-old Income Tax Act, 1961. — The National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill, which reinforces NADA's autonomy as required by the World Anti-Doping Agency, was also passed by the Parliament. — Piloting the Income Tax Bill, 2025, in Rajya Sabha, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said it does not impose any new tax rate and only simplifies the language, which is required for understanding the complex income tax laws. — The new Bill removes redundant provisions and archaic language and reduces the number of Sections from 819 in the Income Tax Act of 1961 to 536 and the number of chapters from 47 to 23. — The Lok Sabha passed the Indian Ports Bill 2025 and the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill 2025 by voice vote. — The Indian Ports Bill 2025 intends to establish and empower State Maritime Boards for effective management of ports other than major ports besides establishing the Maritime State Development Council for fostering structured growth and development of the port sector. — The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill 2025 seeks to widen the scope and territorial domain of the National Mineral Exploration Trust to enable the use of the funds accrued to it within India, including offshore areas, and outside India for the exploration and development of mines and minerals. Other Important Articles Covering the same topic: 📍Explained Interview | Unpacking the National Sports Governance Bill, now in Lok Sabha UPSC Mains Question Covering similar theme: An athlete participates in the Olympics for personal triumph and nation's glory; victors are showered with cash incentives by various agencies, on their return. Discuss the merit of state sponsored talent hunt and its cultivation as against the rationale of a reward mechanism as encouragement. (UPSC CSE 2014) Human-canine conflict is not a novel issue in India…In the present case, the Supreme Court's concern is understandable. When there is complete failure on behalf of the state to address an issue, even the doctrine of separation of powers permits the judiciary to step in and hold the executive accountable. However, the Court's August 11 intervention is legally problematic on multiple counts.' 'The first major problem with the order is that it was passed in contravention of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act, 1960 and the PCA (Animal Birth Control) Rules, 2023, which prohibit the relocation of dogs and provide for the establishment of scientifically proven and robust animal birth control programmes across the country.' 'Second, by ignoring its own jurisprudence on the issue, the Supreme Court has violated the principle of stare decisis (to stand by things decided). The Supreme Court has already settled this in Animal Welfare Board of India vs People for Elimination of Stray Troubles (2024). Reopening the issue in just a little over one year will dilute the people's faith in the certainty and finality of decisions of the apex court.' 'Third, the Supreme Court's order violates a core principle of natural justice: Audi alteram partem (hear the other side).' Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – Indian Express UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X. 🚨 Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for July 2025. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at
The Wire
13 minutes ago
- The Wire
The Liberal International Order: From Wilsonian Internationalist Racism to Trump's Anti-Globalist Racism
Inderjeet Parmar By framing globalisation as detrimental to American workers, Trump cynically exploits domestic workers' discontent while preserving the core of U.S. elite power. US President Donald Trump speaks with reporters in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House on Monday, Aug. 11, 2025, in Washington. Photo: AP/PTI There is a widespread feeling and even considered view that US President Donald Trump is an aberration, an outlier, possibly crazy. He is seen by many as outside the American tradition, an exception within an exceptional national. But appearances are deceptive. The roots of Trumpism lie in the very American system and international order – rooted in the presidency of the liberal Woodrow Wilson in World War I – he claims to abhor. That's why under Trump, America is only recalibrating its attitude to that order, not rejecting it, and preparing to coercively confront the tides of change wherever they arise. There's a particularly moving scene in the movie Gandhi (1982). In it, an American journalist who witnesses British colonial violence against peaceful protestors, breathlessly phoned in to his news desk that, 'Whatever moral ascendancy the West once held was lost here today. India is free, for she has taken all that steel and cruelty can give and she has neither cringed nor retreated.' That West has changed in many ways – its stewardship passed from Britain to the United States. It evolved from direct colonialism to imperialism by another name (a liberal international order). But it remains violent and hierarchical. However, the liberal international order (LIO) and Western moral authority are (once again) withering away before the world's eyes. Nowhere more is this evident than in backing Israel's illegal war of genocidal terror in Gaza. But it is hardly the first time that the most modern weapons known to humankind have been turned onto peoples of the Global South. History is littered with millions of black and brown bodies. Despite that, the LIO is often heralded as a rules-based system promoting democracy, free markets, and global cooperation. But in practice it is, and always was, a widely contested construct – at home and internationally – rooted in the interplay of ideology, power, hierarchy and exclusion. Wilsonianism and Trumpism are but two complementary faces of American power that still leads the international system. Roots of Trumpism at the creation Its origins lie in the early 20th century, particularly in the vision of US President Woodrow Wilson, whose internationalism was deeply imbued with class and racial hierarchies. Wilson was considered a progressive intellectual. He went on to become President of Princeton University, elected Governor of New Jersey, before entering the White House in 1913 and serving two consecutive terms. A progressive liberal, Wilson carried out a sustained policy of racial re-segregation of the federal government. His administration demoted or fired thousands of Black federal workers. It racially segregated offices, restrooms, entrances to buildings, setting back Black rights and reversing gains after the American civil war (1861-65). Wilson's tenure could hardly have been otherwise given the founding principles of the United States, and the reconstruction of de facto and de jure racial hierarchies after the civil war. By 1896, the US Supreme Court had sealed the deal with its 'separate but equal' ruling in Plessey vs Ferguson that cemented the constitutionality of racial segregation that lasted for over six decades. Today, this hierarchical order is sustained, albeit in a transformed guise, through the anti-globalist rhetoric and policies of Trumpism. The liberal international order, built on Wilsonian racist internationalism, has been reconfigured by Trumpist anti-globalism which reinforces American hegemony through white-superiority driven nationalism and selective global engagement. The conclusion from this is bleak: the United States has turned its back on racial and gender equality, civil and workers' rights as it dismantles federal programmes. And it is evident that the US and its Western allies are not ready to accept that the world is moving towards multipolarity, and are willing to fight to maintain their dominance in world politics. Hence, western militarisation is intensifying in an era the US has declared as one marked by the 'return of geopolitical competition'. Prior to that era, the West had the field pretty much to themselves. That's called order. This is not history repeating itself first as tragedy and later as farce; it remains tragic, dangerous and deadly. It may be withering but the liberal international order and its American guarantor are far from dead. Wilsonian internationalism and its racial underpinnings Woodrow Wilson's vision for a new world order, articulated during and after World War I, laid the ideological and institutional foundations for the liberal international order. His 'Fourteen Points' and advocacy for the League of Nations promised self-determination, collective security, and global governance. However, Wilson's internationalism was not a universalist project but one steeped in classist (anti-communist), racial and civilizational hierarchies. Wilson's belief in Anglo-Saxon superiority and domestic policies – such as the resegregation of federal offices – reflected a worldview that prioritized white, Western dominance. Wilson's internationalism was inherently exclusionary. His concept of self-determination was selectively applied, largely reserved for European nations while denying colonised peoples in Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean the same rights. The League of Nations, while ostensibly a global institution, was dominated by Western powers, with non-white nations marginalised or excluded. Japan's attempts to insert a racial equality clause into the League's charter was rejected, Pan-Africanists and other anti-colonialists, ignored. Wilson's vision aligned with the broader imperialist framework of the time, where the United States, as an emerging power, sought to reshape the world in its image – white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, capitalist. This racialised internationalism was not an aberration but a foundational feature of the liberal international order, embedding hierarchies of race and power into its institutions and norms. It continues to this day. The liberal international order, as it evolved through the 20th century, reflected and institutionalised these hierarchies. The creation of the United Nations, the Bretton Woods system (the IMF and World Bank), and NATO reflected American leadership but also perpetuated a system where Western dominance was normalised. These institutions, while promoting liberal values like free trade and 'democracy', served American strategic and economic interests, marginalising non-Western voices and reinforcing global inequalities. The Wilsonian legacy, therefore, was not merely the spread of liberal ideals but the construction of a global order that upheld American hegemony under the guise of universalism. Trumpism and the anti-globalist turn The election of Donald Trump in 2016 marked a seeming rupture in the liberal international order. Trump's 'America First' doctrine, with its rejection of multilateralism, disdain for international institutions, and emphasis on national sovereignty, appeared to challenge the very foundations of the order Wilson helped establish. His withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, the Iran nuclear deal, and his criticism of NATO and the World Trade Organisation signalled a retreat from global leadership. Yet, a closer examination reveals that Trumpist anti-globalism does not dismantle the liberal international order but reconfigures it to serve American interests in a new geopolitical and geoeconomic context. Trump's anti-globalism is less a rejection of American hegemony than a reassertion of it through nationalist means. His policies have imposed tariffs on China, the EU, UK, Israel, among others, and weaponised all aspects of US power. They reflect a desire to maintain American economic dominance in an era of multiple rising and competing powers, not just China. By framing globalisation as detrimental to American workers, Trump cynically exploits domestic workers' discontent while preserving the core of U.S. elite power: its ability to shape and profit from global economic and security arrangements. His administration's focus on 'fair trade' and 'energy dominance' ensures that the United States remains a central player in global markets, even as it eschews multilateral frameworks. Moreover, Trump's foreign policy retains key elements of the liberal international order, particularly its militarised and hierarchical nature. His administrations increased defence spending, strengthened alliances with authoritarian regimes like Saudi Arabia, and maintained U.S. military presence in strategic regions. The 'Indo-Pacific strategy' aimed at countering China's rise is a continuation of (Obama-era) efforts to contain rival powers, a hallmark of the liberal international order since its inception. Thus, Trumpism's anti-globalist rhetoric masks a deeper continuity: the preservation of American primacy through selective weaponised engagement with the world. The paradox of continuity and change The transition from Wilsonian internationalism to Trumpist anti-globalism reveals a paradoxical dynamic, maybe even a secret, at the heart of the liberal international order: its adaptability to different ideological guises while maintaining American dominance. Wilson's vision, rooted in racial hierarchies, established a system where liberal ideals were selectively applied to serve U.S. interests. Trump's anti-globalism, while rhetorically opposed to Wilson's multilateralism, reinforces this system by prioritising American sovereignty and economic power. Recall that it was Wilson who first used 'America First' as his clarion call in World War I. Both Wilson's and Trump's approaches, though seemingly divergent, share a common thread: the use of ideology to legitimise American hegemony. America First, Forever. This continuity is evident in the role of elites in shaping both eras. Wilson's internationalism was driven by a cosmopolitan elite—academics, policymakers, and business leaders—who saw American leadership as essential to global stability. Trump's anti-globalism, while populist in tone, was similarly supported by a coalition of corporate elites, military-industrial interests, and nationalist ideologues who benefited from tax cuts and deregulation. My own research on American power emphasises the role of elite networks in sustaining hegemony, and Trump's era is no exception. The liberal international order, whether under Wilson's idealist garb or Trump's shrill nationalism, remains a project of elite power, adapting to domestic and global shifts while preserving U.S. dominance. Conclusion: A resilient but contested order The liberal international order, built on Wilson's (and the West's) racially-charged internationalism, has proven remarkably resilient, adapting to the challenges of Trumpist anti-globalism. While Wilson's vision embedded racial and civilisational hierarchies into the global system, Trump's policies have reoriented it toward overt nationalism without dismantling its core structures. Both approaches, in their own way, uphold American hegemony, revealing the order's flexibility in accommodating ideological shifts while maintaining power hierarchies. Yet, this resilience comes at a cost. The liberal international order faces growing challenges from rising powers, domestic discontent, and demands for greater inclusivity. The racial underpinnings of Wilson's vision continue to haunt the order, as marginalised nations and peoples question its legitimacy. Similarly, Trump's anti-globalism, while appealing to some domestic audiences, risks alienating allies and undermining the multilateral frameworks that have sustained American power. Understanding the liberal international order requires recognising its contradictions: a system that promotes universal values while perpetuating exclusion and domination. Its future depends not on ideological purity but on its ability to navigate the tensions between global ambition, nationalist retrenchment, domestic resistance, and increasing multipolarity in world politics and economy—challenges that Wilson's heirs and Trump's successors must confront. And they believe in and are preparing for massive and sustained coercive confrontation, everywhere. Inderjeet Parmar is a professor of international politics and associate dean of research in the School of Policy and Global Affairs at City St George's, University of London, a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, and a columnist at The Wire. He is an International Fellow at the ROADS Initiative think tank, Islamabad, and author of several books including Foundations of the American Century. He is currently writing a book on the history, politics, and powers of the US foreign policy establishment. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments. Advertisement
Hans India
13 minutes ago
- Hans India
Conduct SIR across the country, not selectively in poll-bound states: Abhishek Banerjee
Kolkata: Trinamool Congress General Secretary and the leader of the party in the Lok Sabha, Abhishek Banerjee, has dared the BJP-led Central government to immediately dissolve the Lok Sabha and conduct Special Intensive Revision (SIR) by the Election Commission of India (ECI) across the country and not selectively in poll-bound states. Using his social media handle, Banerjee said people of the country have been betrayed after the Election Commission claimed the voters' list in various states is filled with irregularities. "The EC has stated that the voter lists across various states on the basis of which the GENERAL ELECTIONS were held barely a year ago in 2024 are FAULTY and riddled with IRREGULARITIES," he said. "If that is indeed the case, and if the GoI agrees with the EC's assessment, then the first step towards conducting a genuine SIR and STANDING ON MORAL HIGH GROUND is the IMMEDIATE DISSOLUTION OF LOK SABHA. If one truly supports the idea of SIR, then as per the EC's own statement - THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY HAVE BEEN BETRAYED," said the Trinamool Congress leader. He also urged the Election Commission to conduct SIR across the country. "Also, If the new CEC is truly as competent as claimed, then the SIR should be implemented across the country, not selectively in poll-bound states," he said. Banerjee on Tuesday said the SIR proposed by the ECI was acceptable only if the current Parliament is dissolved. He said that if he agreed that SIR was necessary since there were manipulations in the voters' list, then it should also be accepted that the last Lok Sabha elections were conducted with that manipulated voters' list. "So the current Parliament should be dismantled. Since the Prime Minister and the Union Home Minister were elected by that manipulated voters' list, they should also resign. In the meantime, there were Assembly elections in some states, with a manipulated voters' list. So the Assemblies in those states should also be dismantled,' Banerjee told media persons outside the Kolkata Airport. He said that legal action should be initiated against former Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar since, under his leadership, such elections with a 'manipulated voters' list were conducted. The ECI on Monday issued a fact-check dismissing as 'incorrect' statements issued by agitating Opposition leaders over alleged "voter list manipulation".
