15 November 2025

• Govt. notified major provisions of DPDP Act, 2023 and issued DPDP Rules, 2025.
• Implements privacy protections mandated by Puttaswamy (2017).
• Full compliance for big tech firms by May 2027; key obligations deferred till Nov 2026.
• Data Protection Board of India (DPBI) notified with four members.
• Concerns raised over weakening of RTI Act and broad State exemptions.

Key Points

• DPDP Act regulates digital personal data and processing by “data fiduciaries”.
• Allows State exemptions for security and governance.
• Prescribes penalties for data breaches and non-compliance.
• RTI amendment removes public interest override for disclosing personal information.
• Nasscom flags issues: parental consent, short breach disclosures, unclear cross-border rules.
• IFF criticises deferral of core rights and wide State data-collection powers.

Static Linkages

• Article 21 – Right to Privacy.
• Delegated legislation – Rules framed under statutory Acts.
• Section 8(1)(j), RTI Act – personal information exemption.
• Global models: GDPR (EU), PIPL (China).
• Statutory bodies vs constitutional bodies

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • First comprehensive digital privacy law.
  • Promotes global data-flow compatibility.  
  • DPBI ensures enforcement and penalties.  
  • Phased rollout reduces industry burden.
• Cons
  • Broad State exemptions weaken privacy.  
  • RTI dilution impacts transparency.
  •   DPBI may lack independence.
  • Delay in citizen rights reduces accountability.
• Perspectives
  • Govt: privacy-security balance.
  • Industry: predictable cross-border data rules.
  • Civil society: surveillance & transparency issues.

Way Forward

• Narrow State exemptions; add independent oversight.
• Restore RTI public-interest test.
• Strengthen DPBI autonomy.
• Clear cross-border transfer framework.  Promote digital rights awareness.

• India’s 4% ± 2% FIT mandate ends in March 2026; RBI has released a discussion paper seeking views on:
  • Headline vs. core inflation targeting  
  • Acceptable inflation level
  • Optimal inflation band
  • Will shape monetary policy for 2026–2031.

Key Points

• Inflation control remains central as it hurts the poor, distorts savings/investment.
• Chakravarty Committee earlier pegged acceptable inflation at ~4%.
• FIT (2016) kept inflation largely range-bound despite shocks.
• Headline inflation is more appropriate as food inflation spills over into wages and core inflation.
• Threshold analysis (1991–present) places optimal inflation near 3.98% → validates 4% target.
• Little justification for raising the target above 4%.
• Current ±2% band offers adequate flexibility; persistent stay near upper limit erodes credibility.
• Fiscal slippages can weaken FIT—historic deficits (1970s–80s) show risks of monetisation.

Static Linkages

• Types of inflation; CPI as legal anchor (RBI Act, 2016).
• Phillips Curve: long-run no trade-off (Friedman).
• Tools of monetary policy; significance of FRBM Act.
• Shift from deficit monetisation to market-based borrowing (post-1994 reforms).

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Strengthens macro stability; protects vulnerable groups.
  • Enhances policy credibility; anchors expectations.
• Challenges
  • High CPI food weight makes targeting difficult.  
  • Fiscal slippages dilute monetary signalling.
  • Supply shocks (weather, global prices) outside RBI’s control.
• Stakeholder Views
  • RBI: Prefers headline CPI.
  • Government: Seeks flexibility for growth.
  • Households: Need stable food prices.
  • Markets: Prefer predictable inflation.

Way Forward

• Retain 4% target with ±2% band.
• Specify time-limit for remaining near band extremes.
• Strengthen fiscal discipline (FRBM compliance).
• Improve food supply chains to reduce volatility.
• Enhance transparency in MPC forecasts.
• Integrate climate and structural risks in inflation modelling.

GREAT NICOBAR PROJECT TIES MINISTRY IN KNOTS

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• On October 30, 2025, the Environment Ministry admitted before the NGT that the ₹92,000-crore Great Nicobar project will significantly impact the island’s biodiversity.
• The project includes a transshipment port, airport, power plant, tourism hub and township.
• Ministry acknowledged 20,000+ coral colonies, 50+ Nicobar Megapode nests, and a major Leatherback turtle nesting beach at Galathea Bay.
• Concerns arise from 2021 denotification of the Galathea Bay Wildlife Sanctuary and reclassification of the area from CRZ-1A to CRZ-1B.

Key Points

• Project Location: Great Nicobar Island — part of a globally significant biodiversity hotspot with high endemism.
• Critical Species:
  • Nicobar Megapode – Schedule I (Wildlife Protection Act, 1972).
  • Giant Leatherback Turtle – IUCN: Vulnerable.
  • *Extensive coral systems and mangrove ecosystems.
• CRZ-1A Criteria: Mangroves, coral reefs, turtle nesting beaches, seagrass beds, and notified protected areas — all present in Galathea Bay.
• 2021 NBWL Decision: Denotified Galathea Bay Wildlife Sanctuary, contradicting its earlier conservation mandate.
• NGT (April 2023): Observed 20,668 coral colonies at the port site; ruled that the port falls in CRZ-1A, where such construction is prohibited.
• High-Powered Committee/NCSCM: Concluded the site is CRZ-1B, permitting construction — reports not publicly available.
• Forest Department Data: Over 600 leatherback nestings (2024) — among the highest recorded.

Static Linkages

• Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: Nicobar Megapode is a Schedule-I species
• EPA, 1986 & CRZ Notification (2011/2019): Corals, mangroves, and turtle beaches = CRZ- 1A (strictly protected).
• Island ecosystems: Governed by special ecological norms; fragile, high endemism.
• EIA 2006: Requires transparent impact assessment and public access to key reports.

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Enhances strategic maritime presence, logistical capacity, and economic opportunities.
• Concerns
  • Regulatory inconsistency: Sanctuary removed and CRZ category altered to enable construction.
  • Opaque processes: Key ecological reports withheld.
  • High biodiversity risk: Corals, mangroves, endemic species, turtle nesting grounds threatened.
  • Scientific integrity: Contradictions between Ministry’s own submissions and NCSCM/HPC findings.
  • Legal vulnerability: Possible violations of CRZ and Wildlife Act provisions.

Way Forward

• Independent ecological reassessment with public release of reports.
• Restore scientific autonomy of NBWL and EAC.  Apply Precautionary Principle and island- specific ecological zoning.
• Use cumulative impact assessments, not fragmented EIAs.
• Prioritise transparency, accountability, and long-term conservation.

TEPID RELIEF

• The U.S. witnessed its longest-ever shutdown (43 days), driven by a budget standoff over health insurance subsidies for low-income groups (expiring 2025).
• Shutdown ended after a 60–40 Senate vote, supported by 8 Democrats.
• President Trump renewed push to abolish the filibuster.
• Nearly 1.4 million federal employees were furloughed or unpaid; major public services stalled.

Key Points

• Core dispute: renewal of low-income health subsidies; Republicans agreed only to a Senate vote, not House support.
• Economic fallout: disruption in IRS services, air travel, national parks, food stamps (SNAP), early learning programmes.
• Political context: Republicans controlled both chambers; shutdown impacts upcoming mid- term elections focused on jobs, healthcare, immigration, education.
• Democrats’ recent state-level electoral gains could shift federal dynamics.

Static Linkages

• Separation of powers & legislative checks.
• Budget authorization parallels between U.S. appropriations and India’s Consolidated Fund.
• Absence of “Vote on Account” in the U.S.— reason shutdowns occur; India avoids fiscal paralysis.
• Filibuster as a legislative delaying tool (comparable to disruptions, not constitutional majorities).
• Fiscal policy uncertainty and macroeconomic effects.

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Shutdown resolution restores services.
  • Bipartisan support shows temporary cross- party flexibility.
• Concerns
  • 43-day paralysis reflects deep political polarisation.
  • Low-income families face reduced access to essential services.
  • Governance uncertainty affects economy and public trust.
  • Republicans’ rigid stand may alienate moderate voters before mid-terms.

Way Forward

• Institutional safeguards to prevent shutdowns of essential services.
• Filibuster reform or clearer procedural timelines.
• More stable budget negotiations and bipartisan engagement.
• Protect core welfare schemes from political bargaining.
• Improve fiscal predictability to reduce economic disruption.

• On 14 November 2025, the SC’s curative bench reopened Surendra Koli’s conviction in the Nithari killings.
• Reason: Contradictory outcomes from the same evidence across different courts.
• Under Rupa Ashok Hurra (2002), the Court held intervention as a constitutional duty to prevent miscarriage of justice.
• Earlier outcomes:
  • Trial court → Death penalty  
  • SC (2011) → Affirmed
  • HC (2015) → Commuted to life
  • HC (2023) → Acquitted in 12 similar cases
  • SC (2025) → Upheld acquittals

Key Points

• Curative jurisdiction = last judicial remedy after review dismissal.
• Contradictory judgments undermine rule of law, natural justice, and judicial coherence.
• India lacks structured systems for judicial accountability, performance audits, and error review.
• Past inconsistencies: ADM Jabalpur, Mathura rape case, etc.

Static Linkages

• Separation of Powers and Judicial Independence — Constitutional scheme.
• Review, Curative, and Writ Jurisdiction — Constitutional remedies.
• Rule of Law & Natural Justice — Basic features of the Constitution.
• Doctrine of Precedent — Ensures uniformity in judicial decisions.
• Judicial Conduct & Impeachment Process — Constitutional provisions for removing judges.
• Principles of Criminal Justice — Burden of proof, due process, fair trial.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Corrects miscarriage of justice.  Boosts public trust.
  • Reinforces uniformity in criminal justice. Concerns
  • No institutional mechanism to reconcile conflicting rulings.
  • Risk of excessive reliance on curative petitions.  Delayed justice for victims and accused.
  • Accountability mechanisms for judges remain weak.

Way Forward

• Independent Judicial Performance Commission.
• Statutory backing to in-house conduct rules.
• Mechanism to detect and fix conflicting judgments.
• Transparent judicial appointments & peer review.
• Use technology for judgment analytics.

INVEST IN PEOPLE’S RESILENCE,CLEAN ENERGY

Context of the News

• Global Carbon Budget 2025 released during COP-30 (Brazil) shows global CO₂ emissions rising.
• US (+1.9%) saw the highest jump, followed by India (+1.4%), China/EU (+0.4%).
• India’s slower rise due to renewable energy expansion, cooler summer, early monsoon.
• Report warns the world is nearing carbon budget exhaustion for the 1.5°C target.
• A parallel report projects a 2.6°C rise under current pathways.

Key Points

• India’s power-sector emissions dipped in early 2025 vs. 2024.
• National GHG growth rate reduced from 6.4% (2004–15) to 3.6% (2015–24).
• Renewables now overtake coal in global power generation.
• Rising global energy demand keeps fossil fuels entrenched.
• Global emissions may peak around 2030, still inconsistent with Paris pathways.
• Climate commitments insufficient for keeping warming “well below 2°C”.

Static Linkages

• Paris Agreement: NDCs, temperature goals (1.5°C / 2°C).
• India’s NDC:
  • 45% reduction in emissions intensity by 2030 (from 2005).
  • 50% non-fossil capacity target.
• NAPCC Missions: solar, energy efficiency, water, habitat.
• Carbon Budget: IPCC AR6-based global limit for cumulative emissions.

Critical Analysis

• Strengths
  • India shows structural decarbonisation via RE growth.
  • Scientific consensus pushing stronger accountability.
• Concerns
  • India’s absolute emissions still rising.
  • High global energy demand undermines climate goals.
  • Finance gap persists; developing nations under stress.
  • Fossil fuel dependence continues globally. Stakeholders
  • Developing nations: Need finance + tech for just transition.
  • Developed countries: Demand stronger mitigation from emerging economies.
  • Small Island States: Severe survival threat >1.5°C.

Way Forward

• Sharpen sectoral decarbonisation roadmaps.
• Expand storage, green hydrogen, and grid upgrades.
• Accelerate climate finance, Loss & Damage operationalisation.
• Rationalise fossil-fuel subsidies; explore carbon pricing.
• Scale climate-resilient infrastructure + early warning systems.
• Promote LiFE-aligned behavioural changes.