12 November 2025

• The Supreme Court questioned Opposition parties and NGOs over their criticism of the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR), denying claims that it is a “citizenship screening” exercise.
• Justice Surya Kant, CJI-designate, said electoral roll revision is routine under constitutional mandate.
• Petitions filed by DMK, West Bengal MPs, and ADR NGO alleged the accelerated process risks disenfranchisement.
• SIR 2.0 covers 51 crore voters across 12 States/UTs. Enumeration till Dec 4, draft rolls on Dec 9, final rolls on Feb 7, 2026.

Key Points

• Petitioners argue the one-month timeline (earlier ~3 years) may exclude lakhs of voters.
• In Tamil Nadu, only 61.43% forms distributed; 4,713 digitised by Nov 10.
• Confusion arose over inclusion of Bihar SIR extract as a valid identity document.
• The Supreme Court upheld EC’s authority but sought procedural safeguards.
• ADR suggested software-based de-duplication and Gram Sabha verification.

Static Linkages

• Constitutional Basis:
  • Article 324 – Powers of Election Commission.
  • Article 326 – Universal Adult Suffrage.
  • RPA 1950 – Electoral roll preparation & revision.
• Judgments:
  • Mohinder Singh Gill (1978) – EC’s plenary powers.
  • PUCL (2003) – Right to vote as a statutory right.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Ensures periodic voter list updates, strengthens electoral integrity.
  • Judicial oversight promotes transparency. Cons
  • Hasty implementation risks disenfranchising genuine voters.
  • Confusing document rules and digital bottlenecks reduce trust.
  • Political perception challenges EC’s neutrality. Ethical Dimension:
  • Balancing efficiency with fairness and citizens’ right to franchise.

Way Forward

• Upgrade ERONet and digital verification systems.
• Use Gram Sabhas for local verification.
• Allow more time and resources for enumeration.
• Strengthen public communication and transparency.
• Review SIR timelines under RPA 1950.

• The Election Commission of India (ECI) has ordered a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in 12 States/UTs including Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal, ahead of upcoming Assembly elections.
• Similar SIR in Bihar (2024–25) had drawn criticism over its timing and citizenship verification process.
• Several States have moved the Supreme Court, alleging the exercise could disenfranchise voters and exceeds ECI’s powers.

Key Points

• Legal Basis: Under Section 21(2)(b) of the RP Act, 1950 and Rule 25 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, SIR involves house-to- house verification and is akin to a new roll.
• Timing Issue: Last SIR was in 2002–03; holding it right before elections is unusual and may violate the law’s intent.
• Document Dispute: The ECI initially refused to accept Aadhaar as citizenship proof; SC later permitted it temporarily.
• Authority Question: Citizenship falls under the MHA, not ECI — the latter can only verify, not prescribe, documents.
• Judicial Stand: In Lal Babu Hussein (1995), SC held that once a voter’s name is entered, it must be presumed validly verified.

Static Linkages

• Electoral rolls ensure free and fair elections, part of the Basic Structure.
• Right to vote – a statutory right, not fundamental.
• Separation of powers: ECI’s role under Article 324 vs. MHA under Citizenship Act, 1955.
• Articles 14 & 21 – prohibit arbitrary state action.
• ARC Report: transparency and institutional integrity vital to electoral credibility.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Updates rolls, prevents duplication and fraud.
  • Reflects demographic changes due to migration and deaths.

• Cons:
  • Conducted close to elections — risk of exclusion.
  • No notified list of citizenship documents, causing confusion.
  • May strain Centre–State relations. Constitutional Angle:
  • Balancing electoral integrity and inclusiveness.
  • Upholding federalism and constitutional morality.

Way Forward

• Notify citizenship proof list under the Citizenship Act.
• De-link intensive revisions from election schedules.
• Digital verification with privacy safeguards.
• Define ECI’s jurisdiction via judicial clarification.
• Enhance Centre–State consultation for uniformity.

EXPLOITED WORKERS,EMPTY PROMISES

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• The draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025 — a new National Labour and Employment Policy — seeks a “future-ready workforce” rooted in “ancient Indian ethos.”
• Released amid reports of forced and informal labour (ILO 2024: 11 million in modern slavery), it aims to integrate welfare schemes and digitise employment systems but faces concerns over exclusion, funding, and weak enforcement.

Key Points

• Universal Social Security Account: Integrates EPFO, ESIC, PM-JAY, e-SHRAM for lifelong benefits.
• AI-driven National Career Service: For digital job matching and upskilling.
• Female Labour Target: Raise participation to 35% by 2030 with childcare, flexible work, equal pay.
• Safety Reforms: Enforce Occupational Safety Code 2020 and gender-based audits.
• Green-Tech Reskilling: AI-enabled training for coal workers; aligns with SDG 13.
• LEPEI Dashboard: To monitor policy implementation and interlink with Digital India.

Static Linkages

• Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs):  Article 39 – Equal pay for equal work.
  • Article 41 – Right to work and public assistance.
  • Article 42 – Humane conditions of work and maternity relief.
• ILO Conventions:
  •  Convention 29 – Forced Labour.
  • Convention 155 – Occupational Safety and Health.
• Economic Survey 2023-24: Notes that 90% of India’s workforce is informal.
• National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS, 2009):
• Recommended universal social security for informal workers.
• Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: Governs data privacy and surveillance risks in digitised labour governance.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • Integrates fragmented welfare systems.
  • Promotes female employment and green jobs.  
  • Aligns with constitutional and ILO norms.
• Cons:
  • No clear funding or employer obligations.
  • Digital divide excludes vulnerable workers.
  • Weak enforcement, declining unions, AI bias.  
  • Data privacy and accountability concerns.

Way Forward

• Tripartite funding (Centre–State–Employer).
• Offline access for low-literate workers.
• Union involvement and regular audits.  
• AI ethics frameworks to prevent bias.
• Strict penalties for labour law violations.

ACT OF EVIL

• On November 10, 2025, a car explosion near Delhi’s Red Fort killed 13 and injured several.
• UAPA and Explosives Act invoked; NIA leading the probe.
• Prime suspect: Dr. Umar-un-Nabi, from Pulwama, died in the blast; believed linked to a wider terror network.
• The Centre vowed justice; the Opposition sought accountability.
• The incident raises concern over urban terror threats and national security preparedness.

Key Points

• UAPA (1967): Empowers State to ban or designate individuals/organisations as terrorists.
• Explosives Act (1884): Regulates explosive substances.
• NIA Act (2008): Authorises NIA to probe terror crimes across India.
• Highlights need for strong inter-agency coordination and community vigilance.
• Recent NIA actions prevented potential chemical terror plots.

Static Linkages

• Article 22: Safeguards in preventive detention.  Seventh Schedule: “Police” and “Public Order”in State List; security a Union concern.
• Judicial Oversight under UAPA’s special courts.
• Doctrine of Proportionality: Balance between liberty and security.
• Human Security: As per UNDP, ensures freedom from fear and want.

Critical Analysis

• Strengths:
  • Robust legal framework (UAPA, NIA Act)
  • Deterrence through strict laws
  • Central–State coordination in intelligence
• Concerns:
  • Misuse of UAPA; low conviction rate (~3–4%, NCRB)
  • Limited transparency in investigations
  • Communal polarisation risks post-terror incidents
• Stakeholders:
  • Government: Security-first approach
  • Opposition/Civil Society: Stress due process  
  • Citizens: Demand safety and unity

Way Forward

• Strengthen intelligence-sharing mechanisms.
• Ensure judicial and parliamentary oversight.
• Fast-track UAPA trials.
• Promote community policing.
• Counter extremist propaganda through awareness.
• Balance national security with civil liberties.

• On November 9, 2025, the Sri Lankan Navy arrested 14 Tamil Nadu fishermen for crossing the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL).
• This incident adds to the longstanding Palk Bay dispute, rooted in livelihood and sovereignty issues.
• As per CM M.K. Stalin’s letter to EAM S. Jaishankar, 128 Tamil Nadu fishermen remain in Sri Lankan custody.
• The India–Sri Lanka Joint Working Group (JWG) on Fisheries met in October 2024, but progress remains slow.
• The National People’s Power (NPP) government in Sri Lanka has taken a hard stance, limiting breakthroughs.

Key Points

• Palk Bay: Narrow stretch (~137 km) between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka’s Northern Province.
• 1974 & 1976 Maritime Agreements: Divided traditional fishing grounds between both nations.
• Bottom Trawling: Main cause of friction—destroys coral beds, shrimp habitats, and fish stocks.
• Sri Lankan Fishermen: Post-civil war recovery depends on coastal fishing; trawlers harm resources.
• Institutional Setup: The JWG (2016) aims to resolve issues via cooperation, research, and conservation.
• Dialogue Efforts: Include joint studies, sustainable practices, and deep-sea fishing initiatives.

Static Linkages

• UNCLOS (1982): Defines territorial waters, contiguous zones, and EEZs.
• Directive Principles (Art. 39, 43): Promote economic justice and livelihood security.
• Blue Economy: Sustainable use of ocean resources.
• Cooperative Federalism: Involves Centre–State coordination (MEA–Tamil Nadu).
• Environmental Ethics: Intergenerational equity and resource sustainability.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • Encourages peaceful, institutional dialogue and marine conservation (SDG 14).
  • Builds bilateral trust via research and cooperative surveillance.
• Challenges:
  • Persistent bottom trawling despite bans.
  • Weak livelihood alternatives and enforcement.  Political sensitivities on both sides.
  • Ecological damage and reduced fish productivity.
• Stakeholders:
  • TN fishermen: View traditional access as livelihood right.
  • Sri Lankan fishermen: Oppose trawling due to ecological loss.
  • Governments: Balancing livelihood, sovereignty, and environment.

Way Forward

• Phase out bottom trawling with financial aid and strict timelines.
• Promote deep-sea fishing under Blue Revolution schemes.
• Set up a Joint Marine Research Centre in Palk Bay.  Strengthen JWG with time-bound monitoring.
• Support fisher cooperatives and develop eco-tourism & aquaculture alternatives.

RED FORT BLAST SHOWS TERROR PERSISTS

Context of the News

• A blast occurred outside Delhi’s Red Fort Metro Station on November 10, 2025, killing 13 and injuring several.
• Preliminary investigations link the explosion to a possible terror module network operating across Jammu & Kashmir, Haryana, and Delhi.
• The incident followed a joint police operation that uncovered 2,900 kg of ammonium nitrate connected to Kashmiri-origin doctors in Faridabad.
• The event revives concerns over urban terrorism and radicalisation of educated individuals, reflecting a shift from conventional militancy to ideological and cyber-based extremism.

Key Points

• India has experienced relative peace in major cities since the 2011 Delhi High Court bombing.
• Active militant presence in J&K has dropped from ~4,500 (early 1990s) to just over 100 (2025) due to sustained counter-insurgency efforts.
• However, terror support networks — financiers, cyber-recruiters, radicalisers — continue to thrive.
• Pakistan’s ISI remains a central conduit sustaining terrorism through financial incentives, narcotics trade, and cyber propaganda.
• The Red Fort blast underscores the need to integrate technology-driven intelligence and citizen vigilance in India’s counter-terrorism strategy.

Static Linkages

• Terrorism and National Security: India’s approach guided by doctrines such as the National Security Strategy (Draft 2018) and Kargil Review Committee (2000) recommendations.
• Institutional Mechanisms: Role of National Investigation Agency (NIA), National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID), Multi-Agency Centre (MAC), and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967.
• International Cooperation: India’s participation in UN Counter- Terrorism Committee (UNCTC), Financial Action Task Force (FATF), and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation’s RATS.
• Constitutional Angle: Article 355 – duty of the Union to protect States against external aggression and internal disturbance.
• Economic Impact: Terrorism erodes investor confidence and urban growth potential.

Critical Analysis

• Pros / Strengths
  • Improved inter-agency coordination post- 26/11 through MAC and NIA.
  • Decline in cross-border infiltration due to advanced surveillance and fencing.
  • Strategic restraint by leadership enhances diplomatic credibility.
• Challenges / Concerns
  • Radicalisation among educated youth — shifting from militancy to ideology-based extremism.
  • Porous digital and financial channels aiding recruitment and funding.
  • Cyber propaganda and misinformation eroding social harmony.
  • Overdependence on state intelligence; limited community-based vigilance networks.
• Stakeholder Perspectives
  • Security Agencies: Demand better AI-driven threat analytics and database integration.
  • Civil Society: Seeks balance between liberty and security.
  • Government: Pursues calibrated response avoiding communal polarisation.
  • International Community: Concerned about South Asia’s terror financing ecosystem.

Way Forward

• Technology Integration: Expand AI-assisted threat mapping, predictive analytics, and integrated databases across agencies.
• Community Intelligence: Promote citizen vigilance programs; strengthen Police–Public Partnership models.
• Diplomatic Outreach: Deepen engagement with Islamic nations to isolate Pakistan’s proxy model of jihad.
• Cyber Regulation: Strengthen counter- radicalisation through social media monitoring and digital literacy.
• Capacity Building: Regular urban preparedness drills, inter-agency simulations, and rapid response infrastructure.
• Legislative Upgradation: Update UAPA and allied Acts for AI-era terrorism, ensuring safeguards for civil liberties.

PROTESTING FOR THE RIGHT TO BREATHE

Context of the News

• On November 9, 2025, citizens gathered at India Gate, Delhi, protesting worsening air pollution as AQI crossed 400 (“Severe”).
• The peaceful protest highlighted the right to clean air as part of the Right to Life (Article 21).
• Police restrictions at the National War Memorial symbolized the shrinking civic space for environmental expression.

Key Points

• Pollution Source: Vehicular emissions, construction dust, stubble burning.
• Policy Tools:
  • NCAP (2019): Target—40% reduction in PM2.5 & PM10 by 2026.
  • GRAP: Emergency measures for NCR under the Air Act, 1981.
• Health & Economic Impact: 1.67 million deaths annually (Lancet, 2022); $95 billion economic loss (World Bank, 2023).
• Judicial Oversight: MC Mehta vs. Union of India; NGT monitoring air quality enforcement.

Static Linkages

• Art. 21, 48A, 51A(g): Right & duty to protect environment.
• Air & Environment Acts (1981, 1986): Empower CPCB/SPCBs.
• NAAQS: Define permissible pollutant levels.
• Citizen Participation: Anchored in 73rd & 74th Amendments.

Critical Analysis

• Positives:
  • Strengthens civic participation and environmental accountability.
  • Reinforces constitutional morality and democratic protest.
• Challenges:
  • Weak enforcement, poor coordination, and socio-economic disparity.
  • Absence of long-term urban air management strategy.
• Stakeholders:
  • Citizens (rights), Government (governance– growth balance), Judiciary (oversight), Farmers/Industry (transition support).

Way Forward

• Strengthen CAQM and local clean-air cells.  Promote public transport & EV adoption.
• Integrate green budgeting and urban planning.
• Foster citizen-led monitoring and interstate coordination.