23 December 2025

• India and New Zealand concluded negotiations on a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in nine months.
• The agreement aims to double bilateral trade to USD 5 billion in five years and attract USD 20 billion investment over 15 years.
• The FTA will be signed in the first half of 2026.
• It supports India’s strategy of export diversification amid rising global protectionism.

Key Points

• New Zealand will remove or reduce tariffs on 95% of exports to India.
• India excluded sensitive sectors: dairy, rice, wheat, sugar, onions, edible oils, spices, rubber, soya.
• 5,000 temporary employment visas annually (up to 3 years) for:
  • IT, engineering, healthcare, education, construction.
  • AYUSH practitioners, yoga instructors, chefs, music teachers.
• Boost to Indian exports:
  • Apparel, textiles, leather, footwear, home décor.
  • Automobiles, electronics, machinery, pharmaceuticals.
• New Zealand gains duty-free access to:
  • Sheep meat, wool, coal, forestry products.
  • Concessions on kiwi fruit, wine, Manuka honey, seafood.

Static Linkages

• FTAs permitted under Article XXIV of GATT (WTO).
• Services mobility falls under Mode 4 of GATS.
• Export diversification reduces current account vulnerability (Economic Survey).
• FTAs integrate MSMEs into global value chains (NITI Aayog).

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Diversifies export markets.
  • Protects farmers and dairy sector.
  • Boosts services trade and skilled mobility.
  • Supports MSMEs and job creation.
• Concerns
  • Limited farm export gains.
  • Import pressure on select domestic industries.
  • Investment inflows depend on regulatory stability.
  • Visa quota may be limited.

Way Forward

• Periodic FTA impact assessments.
• Improve standards, logistics, and compliance capacity.
• Trade adjustment support for vulnerable sectors.
• Align FTA gains with Make in India & Atmanirbhar Bharat.

PUTIN VISIT TO INDIA AFTERMATH

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• Vladimir Putin visited India for the 23rd India– Russia Annual Summit (Dec 2025), his first visit after Western sanctions post-Ukraine war. pasted
• India hosted the summit despite Western pressure, reaffirming strategic autonomy.
• Joint Statement reiterated the “Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership”, marking 25 years of strategic ties.
• Notably, defence cooperation was not highlighted, unlike past summits.

Key Points

• Emphasis on connectivity and economic cooperation over defence.
• Key corridors highlighted:
  • Northern Sea Route (Arctic)
  • Chennai–Vladivostok Eastern Maritime Corridor
• Cooperation expanded in technology, industry, transport, and energy.
• India maintained neutrality on the Russia– Ukraine conflict.

Static Linkages

• Evolution from Non-Alignment to Strategic Autonomy.
• 1971 Indo-Soviet Treaty reshaped South Asian security.
• Defence diversification alongside legacy dependence on Russia.
• Arctic emerging as a strategic trade and energy zone.
• Limits of sanctions in a multipolar world.

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Reinforces India’s foreign policy independence.
  • Russia remains a reliable long-term partner, especially in defence.
  • Connectivity focus reduces trade and supply-chain risks.
• Concerns
  • Silence on defence creates strategic ambiguity.
  • Risk of secondary sanctions from the West.
  • Over-dependence may constrain future choices.
• Constitutional/Ethical Angle
  • Consistent with Article 51: peaceful relations without compromising national interest.

Way Forward

• Preserve issue-based multi-alignment.
• Accelerate Atmanirbhar Bharat in defence.
• Clearly communicate defence priorities to avoid misperceptions.
• Convert connectivity projects into tangible economic gains.
• Balance Russia ties with Western and Indo-Pacific partnerships.

RIGHT TO DISCONNECT AFTER WORK

• A Private Member’s Bill proposing a Right to Disconnect has been introduced in Parliament to allow employees to disengage from work- related digital communication beyond prescribed working hours.
• The Bill comes in the backdrop of India’s labour law consolidation into four labour codes, which regulate wages, working conditions, industrial relations, and social security.
• Expansion of digital technologies, remote work, and platform-based employment has blurred the traditional boundary between work time and personal time.

Key Provisions

• Employees are granted the right to not respond to work-related calls, emails, or messages beyond official working hours.
• Aims to reduce mental stress, burnout, and excessive employer control enabled by constant digital connectivity.
• Does not define “work” in the context of digital labour, creating legal ambiguity.

Why the Bill is Important

• Conventional labour laws are designed for physical workplaces and fixed schedules.
• In a digital economy, availability itself becomes labour, even without active task performance.
• The Bill recognises this transformation but does not fully integrate it into existing labour jurisprudence.

Static Linkages

• Labour regulation is based on the distinction between working time and rest time.
• Employer control is a central test in determining whether an activity constitutes work.
• Judicial interpretations have linked human dignity, autonomy, and humane working conditions with fundamental rights.

Critical Analysis

• Strengths
  • Acknowledges new forms of exploitation arising from digital labour.
  • Promotes work–life balance and psychological well-being of employees.
  • Initiates an important shift in Indian labour law discourse towards the digital economy.
• Limitations
  • Does not clarify whether after-hours digital communication amounts to work or overtime under labour codes.
  • Creates a conceptual disconnect between regulation of communication and regulation of working time.
  • Fails to specify whether the right is mandatory or contractually negotiable, risking dilution.
  • Constitutional linkage with Article 21 remains implicit rather than explicitly articulated.
• Comparative Perspective
  • In the European Union, judicial precedents treat time spent under employer control—including standby and on-call periods—as working time.
  • Countries like France and Germany integrate digital communication into working-time and rest-period frameworks, often through collective bargaining.
  • Core insight: The right to disconnect is effective only when time under employer control is legally recognised as work.
• Constitutional Dimension
  • Continuous digital availability affects:
    • Right to life with dignity
    • Personal liberty and individual autonomy
  • These are protected under Article 21, but the Bill does not clearly acknowledge or operationalise this constitutional basis.

Way Forward

• Provide a clear legal definition of “work” encompassing digital availability.
• Harmonise the Bill with provisions on working hours and overtime under labour codes.
• Make the right non-derogable, not subject to contractual dilution.
• Explicitly ground the right in Article 21 to strengthen enforceability.
• Encourage collective bargaining and sector-specific guidelines on digital communication norms.

• Widespread violence erupted in Bangladesh after the death of Sharif Osman Hadi, a key leader of the July 2024 uprising.
• Hadi, shot by masked gunmen on December 12, died on December 18 in Singapore.
• Protests turned violent, with mobs attacking media houses (Prothom Alo, The Daily Star), political offices, cultural centres, and symbols of the 1971 liberation struggle.
• A Hindu youth was lynched in Mymensingh over alleged blasphemy.
• The unrest reflects deep instability 15 months after the ouster of Sheikh Hasina.

Key Points

• July 2024 uprising began as an anti- authoritarian movement but later acquired a strong Islamist character.
• Hadi advocated rejection of secular liberation- era values and political space for Jamaat-e- Islami.
• Post-uprising period marked by:
  • Ban on Awami League and its student wing.  
  • Lifting of ban on Islamist groups.
• Rise in mob violence, minority targeting, and attacks on press freedom.
• Interim leadership under Muhammad Yunus lacks mandate and enforcement capacity.
• Anti-India sentiment amplified by Islamist mobilisation.

Static Linkages

• Secularism in nation-building  State monopoly over violence
• Minority protection as human rights obligation  Free media as democratic safeguard
• Electoral legitimacy and political stability

Critical Analysis

• Opportunities
  • Fall of authoritarianism created scope for democratic renewal.
• ChallengeS
  • Transition mismanaged, leading to mob rule.
  •  Politicisation of religion undermines pluralism.
  • Minority violence erodes constitutional morality.
  • Media intimidation weakens accountability. 
  • Anti-India rhetoric risks regional instability.

Way Forward

• Restore law and order through neutral institutions.
• Ensure minority protection and curb hate crimes.
• Rebuild political pluralism by lifting selective bans.
• Clearly separate religion from state power.
• Conduct inclusive, free, and credible elections.
• Strengthen administrative and policing capacity.

STEP UP

Context of the News

• On December 19, the Supreme Court of India expanded the legal interpretation of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) under Indian company law.
• The ruling emerged from long-running proceedings (since 2021) to curb deaths of the Great Indian Bustard due to overhead power transmission lines.
• The Court held that environmental and wildlife protection are intrinsic to CSR, not optional corporate philanthropy.
• CSR spending on conservation was linked to Article 51A(g), treating it as a constitutional obligation of corporations as legal persons.
• The judgment operationalises expert committee recommendations (2024) balancing biodiversity protection with renewable energy expansion.

Key Points

• CSR under the Companies Act, 2013 is an enforceable statutory duty, not discretionary spending.
• Corporations, as legal persons, share constitutional environmental duties.
• CSR funding for conservation is framed as duty- based compliance, not charity.
• Stronger legal footing for corporate financing of ecological damage caused by infrastructure.
• Shift from a blanket 2021 restriction (99,000 sq. km) to priority habitat-based regulation.
• CSR funds can support:
  • Captive breeding and release programmes.
  • Grassland restoration and long-term habitat upkeep.

Static Linkages

• Article 51A(g): Duty to protect environment and wildlife.
• Environmental Principles: Polluter Pays, Precautionary Principle, Public Trust Doctrine.
• Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: Species and habitat conservation.
• Corporate Personality Doctrine: Legal obligations of companies.
• Sustainable Development: Growth–environment balance.

Critical Analysis

• Strengths
  • Converts CSR from voluntary goodwill to legal responsibility.
  • Enables sustained non-budgetary funding for conservation.
  • Reduces conflict between renewables and wildlife via targeted regulation.
• Limitations
  • No clarity on who pays, how much, when, and how outcomes are audited.
  • Enforcement still depends on existing CSR penalty provisions.
  • Bustard habitats are dynamic; risks may extend beyond mapped areas.
  • Success hinges on administrative capacity and execution speed.

Way Forward

• Issue clear rules linking CSR liability to ecological impact.
• Use dynamic habitat mapping instead of static boundaries.
• Ensure outcome-based audits of CSR-funded conservation.
• Integrate CSR flows with national species recovery plans.
• Strengthen Centre–State–utility coordination for timely undergrounding.