01 December 2025

• The Election Commission of India (ECI) has extended the deadlines for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in nine States and three Union Territories by one week.
• The extension comes amid reports of severe stress among Booth-Level Officers (BLOs) and opposition concerns regarding tight timelines and BLO fatalities.
• The revision affects over 51 crore voters in the second phase and precedes major Assembly elections scheduled for 2026.
• The move aims to ensure transparency and adequate time for BLO–BLA (Booth Level Agents) coordination before the draft rolls are published.

Key Points

• New schedule:
  • Enumeration till Dec 11; draft roll Dec 16; final roll Feb 14.
• Progress:
  • Forms distributed: 99.65%; digitised: 84.30%.
  • Uttar Pradesh lowest digitisation (69.56%); West Bengal (95.24%).
• Political concerns: BLO stress deaths; protests expected in Parliament.
• Election relevance: TN, Kerala, WB, Puducherry polls in 2026.
• Bihar Phase I: 68 lakh deletions.

Static Linkages

• Electoral rolls prepared under Article 324 powers of the ECI.
• Representation of the People Act, 1950 lays down procedures for preparation and revision of electoral rolls.
• Booth-Level Officers (BLOs) introduced in 2006 to strengthen grassroots electoral roll management.
• Electoral roll purification linked to ECI’s EVP Programme (Electoral Verification Programme).
• Deletion of duplicate/shifted/deceased voters supports the goal of universal adult franchise and free and fair elections.
• SIR is distinct from the Annual Summary Revision normally conducted every year.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Improves roll accuracy and transparency.  
  • Reduces BLO workload pressure.
  • Strengthens BLO–BLA verification.
• Cons
  • Administrative overload close to elections.  
  • Stress on BLOs remains high.
  • Political concerns over rushed deletions.

Way Forward

• Limit BLO workload; provide support systems.
• Expand digital verification tools.
• Create dedicated electoral roll management cadre.
• Independent audits for roll revisions.
• Strengthen public participation in verification.

ANIMAL REPRESENTATION REFORM

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• Recent debates in constitutional and environmental law highlight the structural exclusion of animals from democratic institutions.
• Calls for non-majoritarian fiduciary bodies to represent animal interests have resurfaced following concerns regarding ineffective committees, including the Supreme Court- appointed panel for captive elephants.
• Rising cases of wildlife conflict, captive cruelty, and industrial exploitation emphasise the need for institutional accountability and structural reform, beyond welfare-based approaches.

Key Points

• Democracy is built on a human–animal divide, treating animals as property, not subjects.
• Animals lack electoral power, lobbying capacity, and legal standing → interests consistently overridden.
• Proposal: Create independent fiduciary institutions to represent animal interests in governance.
• Basis of representation: sentience and vulnerability, not human-like cognition.
• Need for constitutionally protected, expert- driven, politically insulated bodies with enforcement powers.

Static Linkages

• Constitutional provisions:
  • Art. 48 & 48A – State’s duty to protect environment and wildlife.
  • Art. 51A(g) – Fundamental Duty to show compassion to living creatures.
• Legal Framework: Wildlife Protection Act 1972, PCA Act 1960 (weak penalties noted by multiple Law Commission reports).
• Jurisprudence: Supreme Court in A. Nagaraja (2014) recognised animal dignity and “five freedoms”.
• Political Theory: Non-majoritarian institutions like Election Commission, CAG, and environmental regulators demonstrate trusteeship models.
• NCERT (Society & Polity): Human-centric political systems and debates on rights of marginalised groups.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Corrects structural bias in majoritarian systems.
  • Ensures proactive protection via expert-led assessments.
  • Strengthens transparency through audits and published decisions.
  • Converts personality-based advocacy into institutional routines.
• Cons
  • Risk of political or industry capture.
  • Requires specialised expertise and reliable data.
  • Possible resistance from agriculture, dairy, and entertainment sectors.
  • Overlaps with existing bodies may create administrative friction.
• Stakeholder Views
  • Advocates: support stronger guardianship.  Industries: fear increased scrutiny.
  • Government: balancing welfare and economic interests.
  • Citizens: growing support but livelihood concerns remain.

Way Forward

• Pilot fiduciary models (urban planning, transport rules).
• Mandate Animal Welfare Impact Assessments.
• Statutory/constitutional status for independence.
• Strengthen PCA Act with scientific welfare standards.  
• Transparent welfare databases and audits.
• Public education to build a culture of stewardship.

TAMIL NADU SHOWS WAY IN AIDS – TB CARE

• World AIDS Day (Dec 1) marks global progress in HIV control.
• India in the early 1990s faced rising HIV prevalence, similar in pattern (though lower intensity) to Africa.
• Tamil Nadu’s TNSACS (1994) introduced an autonomous fund-flow model that later became the national template.
• WHO Global TB Report 2025 highlights a severe TB burden:  25% of global TB cases and
  • 25% of MDR-TB cases are in India.
  • 7.5% of global HIV infections also in India.
• TB remains the leading opportunistic infection in HIV patients.

Key Points

• India’s HIV prevalence fell from 0.54% (2000) * 0.22% (now) after expansion of State AIDS Control Societies.
• Five States—UP, Maharashtra, MP, Bihar, Rajasthan—report 56% of TB cases (2024).
• Tamil Nadu deploys ICMR-NIE predictive software to identify high-risk TB patients.
• India’s 2025 TB elimination target is unmet, though decline is faster than global rate.
• PM TB Mukt Bharat Abhiyan supports treatment adherence, nutrition, and CSR participation.

Static Linkages

• Article 21 → Right to Health.
• TB: Mycobacterium tuberculosis; airborne; managed under NTEP (RNTCP earlier).
• HIV: Retrovirus; sexual/blood/needle/mother- to-child transmission.
• WHO End TB Strategy (2030 targets).
• Registered Society model → greater autonomy for health missions (e.g., NHM societies).

Critical Analysis

• Strengths:
  • Autonomous fund-flow (TNSACS) enabled rapid campaigns.
  • Strong community and NGO participation.
  • Decline in HIV prevalence demonstrates effective coordinated action.
• Challenges:
  • Persistent high TB burden in certain States.
  • MDR-TB treatment is long and resource intensive.
  • Under-reporting and social stigma remain barriers.
  • TB–HIV co-infection requires integrated management.
• Governance/Ethical Lens:
  • Balancing surveillance with patient privacy.
  • Ensuring equitable access to diagnostics, nutrition, and treatment.

Way Forward

• Scale predictive analytics (AI/ICMR models) across States.
• Strengthen universal DST, GeneXpert availability, and treatment adherence.
• Improve nutrition support and socio-economic assistance.
• Integrate HIV–TB screening and counselling.
• Intensify campaigns in high-burden States.
• Expand community partnerships for awareness and stigma reduction.

• The Centre planned to introduce the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025 to include Chandigarh under Article 240, enabling the President to frame regulations for UTs without legislatures.
• Strong backlash from Punjab over concerns of federal overreach and violation of historical commitments regarding Chandigarh’s status.
• After uproar, the Centre clarified that the Bill will not be introduced in the 2025 Winter Session.
• Punjab stakeholders criticised the absence of consultation and perceived attempts to dilute regional interests.
• The controversy revives the long-standing claim of Punjab over Chandigarh based on:  
  • Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966
  • 1970 Indira Gandhi–Lal Bahadur Shastri agreement 
  • 1985 Rajiv–Longowal Accord

Key Points

• Article 240 empowers the President to make regulations for UTs without legislatures (e.g., Lakshadweep, A&N Islands, DNHDD).
• Chandigarh is currently governed under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, with the Punjab Governor as Administrator.
• The proposed amendment sought to “align” Chandigarh with other UTs when its Assembly (if any) is dissolved or suspended — triggering fears of enhanced central control.
• Punjab alleges unilateralism as the information came through parliamentary bulletins, not structured consultations.
• Chandigarh continues to be a contested capital between Punjab and Haryana; several past accords on transfer remain unimplemented.
• Punjab’s border-security and militancy history increases the political sensitivity of administrative decisions involving the State.

Static Linkages

• Union Territories (Article 239–241): UTs administered by the President through Administrators; varying degrees of autonomy.
• President’s legislative powers: Under Article 240, President’s regulations have force of an Act of Parliament in specified UTs.
• Seventh Schedule: Federal balance via Union, State, Concurrent Lists.
• Cooperative Federalism vs Unitarian Bias: India follows “quasi-federal” structure (K.C. Wheare).
• Reorganisation of States (Article 3): Parliament’s primacy in altering state areas, boundaries, capitals.
• Sarkaria Commission (1983) & Punchhi Commission (2010): Stress consultation with States on matters affecting them.
• Supreme Court on Federalism:
  • S.R. Bommai (1994) – federalism is part of the basic structure.
  • NCT of Delhi vs Union of India (2018) – federalism requires “collaborative governance”.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Aligns Chandigarh with other UTs lacking legislatures.  
  • Provides clarity during administrative breakdowns.
• Cons
  • Seen as federal overreach.
  • Undermines past political commitments.
  • Perception of central dominance in a sensitive border state.
  • Lack of political consultation → trust deficit. Dimensions
  • Moral obligation to honour accords.
  • Federalism as cooperative, not unilateral.
  • Sensitive implications for Punjab’s identity and security.

Way Forward

• Institutionalised Centre–State consultations.
• Revisit Chandigarh status through political dialogue.  
• Use Inter-State Council mechanisms.
• Follow Sarkaria/Punchhi recommendations.
• Ensure transparency in constitutional proposals.

INDIA’S LEGISLATURE IN RETREAT

Context of the News

• Growing concerns over weakening parliamentary scrutiny and rising executive dominance.
• Sharp drop in Lok Sabha sitting days, limited debates, and rapid passage of Bills.
• Anti-defection law increasingly curtails independent voting.
• Opposition voices restricted; Question Hour/Zero Hour often disrupted.

Key Points

• Sitting Days Decline:
  • 1st Lok Sabha (1952–57): 135 days/year (average).
  • 17th Lok Sabha: ~55 days/year (PRS Legislative Research).
•  Anti-defection Law Impact:
  • MPs bound by the party whip even in matters that require independent judgment (e.g., Budget grants, impeachment).
  • Loss of conscience vote → weakened deliberation.
• Executive Dominance:
  • Bills passed in minutes without discussion.  Low referral of Bills to Parliamentary
  • Committees (declined from ~70% in 15th LS to ~18% in 17th LS).
• Opposition Marginalisation:
  • Adjournment notices and debates often not admitted; Opposition resorts to disruptions.
  • Decline of Parliamentary Conventions:
  • Question Hour and Zero Hour frequently disrupted.
  • Constitutional offices perceived as less neutral.
• Global Contrast:
  • UK’s PMQs, strong committee systems in UK/US ensure higher executive accountability.

Static Linkages

• Parliamentary Privileges (Constitution, Articles 105 & 122).
• Anti-Defection Law: 52nd Amendment, Tenth Schedule; Supreme Court (Kihoto Hollohan, 1992).
• Separation of Powers – implicit under basic structure.
• Financial Control – Budget, Cut Motions, CAG (Art. 266–267, 148).
• Role of Speaker – neutrality convention from British parliamentary practices.
• Committee System – Estimates, Public Accounts, Public Undertakings Committees.
• Westminster Model – collective responsibility, legislative oversight.

Critical Analysis

• Strengths
  • Stability of governments.  Faster decision-making.
• Concerns
  • Weak accountability; shrinking space for dissent.
  • MPs reduced to numerical votes.  
  • Committees losing relevance.
  • Executive bypassing debate and scrutiny.
  • Decline of conventions → institutional erosion.
• Stakeholders
  • Govt: efficiency.
  • Opposition: space for debate.  
  • Citizens: transparency.
  • Experts: long-term democratic risk.

Way Forward

• Limit whips to confidence/money Bills.  
• Mandate 100–120 sitting days.
• Make committee referral compulsory.
• Guarantee Opposition time and urgent discussions.
• Codify neutrality norms for presiding officers.  
• Protect Question Hour/Zero Hour.
• Introduce a PMQs-type accountability mechanism.
• Strengthen pre-legislative consultation.

SCHRODINGER’S SLOW RISE ECONOMY

Context of the News

• India posted higher-than-expected real GDP growth:
  • Q1 FY26: 7.8%, Q2 FY26: 8.2%.
• Growth remains strong despite US tariffs and global uncertainties.
• Nominal GDP slowed sharply due to disinflation: 10.7% → 8.8% → 8.7%.
• Nominal growth stayed single-digit in 5 of 6 quarters, raising fiscal concerns.
• Major GDP, CPI, IIP revisions in 2026 may alter key macro indicators.
• RBI hints at rate-cut space, but strong growth complicates timing.

Key Points

• Manufacturing & services grew ~9% helped by:  Low base, low deflator, export frontloading, festive stockpiling, GST cuts.
• Private consumption rose 90 bps, while investments remained steady.
• Weak nominal GDP affects:
• Tax revenue (H1 net taxes grew only 9%)   Fiscal deficit ratio (denominator effect)  Corporate revenue/margins
• Economy needs only 5.7% growth in H2 to meet RBI’s 6.8% FY26 projection.
• Outlook hinges on:
  • Sustainability of GST-driven demand  
  • Duration of US tariffs
  • Impact of 2026 statistical revisions.

Static Linkages

• GDP vs GVA: CSO calculates GDP using production, expenditure, and income methods
• Base effect: Low prior-year numbers can inflate growth rates.
• GDP deflator: A measure of inflation; falling deflator * higher real but lower nominal growth.
• Fiscal deficit formula: Expressed as % of nominal GDP.
• Automatic stabilizers: Tax revenues fall during low nominal growth periods.
• IIP: Measures industrial output across mining, manufacturing, and electricity.
• CPI: Measures retail inflation, used by RBI for inflation targeting.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Strong real growth and low inflation boost purchasing power.
  • Recovery in manufacturing/services broad-based.
  • Policy measures have aided consumption and supply chains.
• Concerns
  • Low nominal growth hurts tax buoyancy, corporate revenues, fiscal math.
  • Real growth may be overstated due to unusually low deflator.
  • Persistent US tariffs may impact exports and jobs.  
  • 2026 dataset revisions may shift current macro assessments.
• Stakeholders
  • Government: Fiscal consolidation becomes challenging.
  • RBI: Must avoid overstimulating an already strong economy.
  • Industry: Wants rate cuts but faces weak nominal earnings.
  • Households: Benefit from low inflation, but employment sensitivity remains.

Way Forward

• Improve tax compliance & GST rationalisation.
• Recalibrate fiscal targets with realistic nominal growth assumptions.
• Diversify export markets amid tariff risks.
• Communicate clearly during 2026 statistical revisions.
• Maintain cautious monetary stance until inflation stabilises.
• Promote productivity-led and investment-driven growth.