1) Challenges and Future of India’s Sovereign Green Bonds

GS 3: Economy: Sovereign Green Bonds

Why is it in the news?

• India, like many emerging markets, has turned to sovereign green bonds to finance its transition to a low-carbon economy. However, investor demand remains weak, limiting the benefits of a “greenium”—the lower borrowing costs typically associated with such bonds.
• As a result, key projects, including grid-scale solar, have faced funding cuts. With muted investor interest, the government is relying on general revenue to bridge the shortfall.

What Are Green Bonds?

• Green bonds are debt instruments issued by governments, corporations, and multilateral banks to finance projects that reduce emissions or enhance climate resilience. These bonds typically have lower yields than conventional bonds, providing a cost advantage to issuers.
• The difference in yield, known as the “green premium” or “greenium,” determines how much cheaper it is for issuers to raise funds. Investors in green bonds generally seek stable, long-term returns and may have mandates to allocate funds to green financing.
• Despite their potential, green bonds still form a small portion of the overall debt market and climate financing.

India’s Sovereign Green Bonds (SGrBs)

• Sovereign green bonds (SGrBs) are issued by sovereign entities like the Government of India. India established a framework for SGrBs in 2022, defining “green projects” as those that enhance energy efficiency, reduce emissions, improve climate resilience, and protect ecosystems.
• Since 2022-23, India has issued SGrBs eight times, raising nearly ₹53,000 crore. Around 50% of the proceeds have been allocated to manufacturing energy-efficient electric locomotives through the Ministry of Railways.
• For 2024-25, the revised estimates for SGrB allocations include ₹12,600 crore for electric locomotive production, ₹8,000 crore for metro projects, ₹4,607 crore for renewable energy projects (including the National Green Hydrogen Mission), and ₹124 crore for afforestation under the National Mission for a Green India.

Weak Investor Demand for SGrBs

• Despite government efforts, demand for India’s SGrBs remains weak, making it difficult to secure a meaningful greenium. Even with relaxed rules for foreign investors, auctions have seen limited participation, with bonds often devolving to primary dealers.
• While global greeniums reach 7-8 basis points, in India, they hover around just 2-3 basis points, limiting the cost advantage of issuing SGrBs.
• A major challenge is liquidity. Small issue sizes and the tendency of investors to hold bonds until maturity have restricted secondary market trading, reducing their appeal.
• Additionally, India lacks a strong network of social impact funds and responsible investment mandates, which in other markets play a crucial role in boosting green bond demand.

Consequences of Weak Demand

• The government’s difficulty in raising sufficient funds from SGrBs affects key green projects and shifts financial pressure onto general revenue.
• Initially, the estimated requirement from SGrB proceeds for 2024-25 was ₹32,061 crore, but after multiple unsuccessful issuances, the revised estimate was lowered to ₹25,298 crore.
• This has led to a significant reduction in allocations, particularly for grid-scale solar projects, which were slashed from ₹10,000 crore to just ₹1,300 crore.
• For the current financial year, expected proceeds from SGrBs stand at ₹21,697 crore, with the government needing to draw an additional ₹3,600 crore from general revenue to cover the shortfall.

Way Forward

• A World Bank report suggests that emerging markets, including India, should consider issuing sustainability bonds—those that finance a combination of green and social projects—to attract more investors. These bonds have seen greater success in other developing economies compared to pure green bonds.
• Additionally, the slow publication of post-issuance allocation and impact reports affects investor confidence. Investors use these reports to assess how funds are utilized and refine their data models. The Department of Economic Affairs has yet to publish the allocation report for 2023-24, which may be discouraging investors.
• To boost credibility and demand, India could collaborate with multilateral development banks, leveraging their strong credit ratings to enhance investor confidence in SGrBs. Strengthening liquidity, improving transparency, and exploring sustainability-linked bonds could help expand green financing in India.

2) President’s Rule in Manipur

GS 2: Polity and Governance: Imposition of President’s Rule

Why is it in the news?

• On February 13, the Union government imposed President’s Rule in Manipur, following Chief Minister’s resignation on February 9. A Ministry of Home Affairs notification stated that President Droupadi Murmu was satisfied that the State government could not function as per the Constitution.
• The decision was driven by the ongoing ethnic conflict between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities since May 2023, which has claimed over 250 lives and displaced more than 60,000 people. The crisis escalated as the party’s leadership struggled to appoint a successor.

Constitutional Basis for President’s Rule

• President’s Rule, also known as “State Emergency” or “Constitutional Emergency,” is imposed under Article 356 when a State government fails to function per constitutional provisions.
• This provision is part of the emergency powers in Part XVIII of the Indian Constitution, inspired by the German model, ensuring India’s sovereignty and stability.
• The Centre assumes executive control of the State, while legislative powers are transferred to Parliament. The High Court’s jurisdiction remains unaffected. Additionally, Article 365 allows the President to act if a State defies Union directions.
• A proclamation under Article 356 must be approved by both Houses of Parliament within two months by a simple majority. If approved, it lasts six months and can be extended up to three years with parliamentary approval.
• Beyond one year, an extension requires the existence of a national emergency or a declaration by the Election Commission that elections in the State are not feasible.

Difference Between President’s Rule and National Emergency

• A “National Emergency” under Article 352 differs significantly from President’s Rule. It is declared when India’s security is threatened by war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. This has happened thrice: during the 1962 India-China war, the 1971 war with Pakistan, and the 1975 internal emergency declared by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
• The 44th Constitutional Amendment (1978) introduced safeguards against misuse, replacing “internal disturbance” with “armed rebellion,” requiring a written Cabinet recommendation, and limiting the suspension of fundamental rights under Articles 20 and 21.
• National emergencies need approval by a special majority and have no fixed duration, whereas President’s Rule can last only up to three years. Unlike national emergencies, where the State government remains functional, President’s Rule suspends or dissolves the State legislature.
• In Manipur’s case, the Assembly remains in “suspended animation,” meaning it could be revived if political stability is restored.

Impact on Fundamental Rights and Administration

• President’s Rule does not suspend fundamental rights, unlike a national emergency, which limits Article 19 freedoms and allows the President to suspend other rights except Articles 20 and 21.
• Under Article 357, Parliament can delegate legislative power to the President, who governs the State through the Governor with assistance from advisers or the Chief Secretary. Additionally, the President can authorize expenditures from the State’s Consolidated Fund.

Historical Use and Misuse of President’s Rule

• Despite Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s hope that Article 356 would remain a “dead letter,” it has been invoked 134 times since 1950. The first instance occurred in Punjab in 1951.
• Manipur has witnessed President’s Rule 11 times, the highest among Indian States, alongside Uttar Pradesh. Manipur’s longest imposition lasted over two years (1969–1972).
• Jammu & Kashmir holds the record for the longest cumulative period (over 12 years), followed by Punjab (over 10 years) and Puducherry (over seven years).

Supreme Court’s Stand on President’s Rule

• Initially, courts upheld frequent impositions of President’s Rule. However, the landmark R. Bommai vs. Union of India (1994) case established judicial review of Article 356.
• The Supreme Court ruled that President’s Rule must be a last resort and not used for political motives. It emphasized that States are not mere extensions of the Centre and that the President’s satisfaction in declaring an emergency is subject to judicial scrutiny. The court also mandated that Parliament’s approval is required before dissolving a State Assembly.
• The Bommai judgment reaffirmed that Article 356 should address only constitutional breakdowns, not routine law-and-order failures, ensuring that the provision is not misused for political purposes.

3) Big Tech’s Retreat from DEI Initiatives

GS 2: International Relations: U.S. DEI Policy

Why is it in the news?

• Following U.S. President Donald Trump’s return to the White House, major tech companies such as Google, Meta, and Amazon began scaling back their Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Many either rolled back existing programs or decided to halt new DEI efforts.
• This shift coincided with Trump’s executive order aimed at ending DEI initiatives in government, calling them “illegal and immoral discrimination programs.”

Understanding DEI

• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives aim to create workplaces that reflect a diverse population, ensure fairness by addressing historical injustices, and provide support to individuals from marginalized communities.
• DEI programs help counter discrimination based on gender, race, caste, religion, disability, or sexual orientation.
• While many companies adopted DEI policies after the 2020 killing of George Floyd, some had already been supporting global diversity efforts before that. These initiatives include hiring from underrepresented groups, funding training programs, and promoting inclusive work environments.

Criticism and Opposition to DEI

• DEI initiatives have faced criticism from both ends of the political spectrum. Some argue that corporate DEI policies do not sufficiently address systemic injustices, while others claim they unfairly disadvantage majority groups.
• Tesla and X (formerly Twitter) owner Elon Musk has been an outspoken critic, claiming that DEI compromises meritocracy and has negative consequences in critical sectors. He has repeatedly used the phrase “DEI means people DIE” to express his opposition.

Tech Companies Scaling Back DEI Efforts

Several major tech firms have either quietly discontinued or actively dismantled their DEI initiatives:

• Amazon: While ending its diversity and inclusion programs, Amazon still supports employee-led groups such as ‘Amazon People with Disabilities’ and ‘Glamazon’ (for LGBTQ+ employees).
• Meta: The company scrapped its fact-checking program, eased restrictions on sensitive topics, and discontinued DEI efforts for employees and suppliers. CEO Mark Zuckerberg criticized what he called a lack of ‘masculine energy’ in workplaces.
• Google: Alphabet, Google’s parent company, stopped pursuing diversity hiring goals, removed mentions of DEI from its annual report, and eliminated references to Pride Month and Black History Month from Google Calendar.
• Other Companies: Firms such as Disney, Comcast, General Electric (GE), Intel, PayPal, and Regeneron have also adjusted their DEI policies, often by softening or rewording their commitments.

Tech Companies Still Supporting DEI

Despite the backlash, some companies continue to uphold their DEI commitments:

• Apple: The company rejected a proposal to abolish its DEI policies, affirming its status as an equal opportunity employer.
• McKinsey & Co.: Its Global Managing Partner, Bob Sternfels, reaffirmed the firm’s commitment to diversity and meritocracy.
• Microsoft: The tech giant’s Chief Diversity Officer stated that DEI remains central to Microsoft’s mission of building inclusive products and workforces.
• Other Supporters: Companies like Costco and Pinterest have also maintained their DEI policies despite external pressures.

Impact of DEI in the Tech Industry

• DEI policies have provided tangible benefits to tech workers, including visa sponsorship for foreign employees, accessibility-friendly workspaces, hybrid work models for parents and caregivers, and protection from discrimination based on religion, gender, or sexual orientation.
• These initiatives have supported leaders like Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai (against racism), Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg (against antisemitism), and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman (against queerphobia and antisemitism).
• However, DEI measures do not always ensure an equitable workplace. Some companies claiming to champion DEI still reject immigrant applicants needing work visas. Additionally, DEI strategies developed in the U.S. may not fully address global discrimination issues like casteism or colourism.
• Critics also argue that DEI hiring policies can sometimes backfire, reinforcing stereotypes that underrepresented employees were selected for diversity rather than merit.

The Future of DEI in a Shifting Tech Landscape

• As economic instability continues and political dynamics shift, the tech sector’s approach to DEI remains uncertain. While some companies reaffirm their commitment to inclusive workplaces, others are retreating under political and economic pressures.
• With ongoing debates on the merits and drawbacks of DEI, the future of workplace diversity in the tech industry remains unpredictable.

4) Hidden Hunger in Rural India

GS 2: Society: Concern over protein deficiency  

Why is it in the news?

• A recent study by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) reveals that rural Indians experience significant protein deficiencies despite having access to or being able to afford protein-rich foods.

Key Findings

• Widespread Protein Deficiency: Over two-thirds of households in India’s semi-arid regions consume less protein than recommended, even though protein-rich foods are available.
• Overdependence on Staples: Dietary patterns in these regions rely primarily on cereals like rice and wheat, which account for 60–75% of daily protein intake.
• Limited Use of Protein-rich Foods: Despite availability, foods such as pulses, dairy, eggs, and meat are underutilized due to a combination of cultural food preferences, lack of awareness, and economic factors.
• Nutritional Gaps in Affluent Families: Even wealthier households, capable of affording a diverse diet, often fail to meet the recommended protein intake. Families where women have higher education levels are more likely to consume a balanced diet.
• Role of the Public Distribution System (PDS): While India’s PDS has successfully improved calorie intake, it has reinforced a cereal-heavy diet without ensuring adequate protein consumption.

Factors Influencing Dietary Choices

• Cultural Preferences – Long-standing dietary habits prioritize staple grains over protein-rich foods.
• Lack of Awareness – Limited understanding of the role of protein in nutrition leads to unbalanced diets.
• Financial Barriers – While affordability is an issue for some, others fail to diversify their diets despite financial capability.

Recommendations for Improvement

• Enhancing Food Programs – Government schemes should include more pulses, millets, and protein-dense foods to address nutritional deficiencies.
• Region-Specific Strategies – Tailored interventions can promote balanced diets based on local dietary habits and food availability.
• Nutrition Education – Public health programs and school curricula should integrate nutrition awareness to encourage healthier eating habits.
• Diversified Agriculture – Farmers should be supported to cultivate a broader range of nutrient-rich crops.

5) HC Ruling on Marital Rape Exception

GS 2: Polity and Governance: Non-consensual sexual offenses

Why is it in the news?

• The Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that the marital rape exception in Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) also extends to Section 377, which criminalized “unnatural sex.” Section 375, which defines rape, explicitly excludes non-consensual sex between a husband and wife if the wife is an adult.
• However, Section 377, originally meant to criminalize homosexuality, does not contain this exception. This ruling effectively removes one of the few legal provisions available to married women seeking recourse against non-consensual sex in marriage.

Case Background and HC Verdict

• The ruling came in an appeal by a man convicted of culpable homicide following his wife’s death in 2017. A trial court had found that his wife fell ill and died due to forced sexual relations. The court convicted him under Sections 375 (rape), 377, and 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
• However, the High Court reversed the conviction, stating that non-consensual sex within marriage—whether vaginal or otherwise—was not a criminal offense due to the marital rape exception.

Legal Interpretation and SC Precedent

• The HC noted that Section 375 retains the marital rape exception even after the 2013 amendment expanding the definition of rape. It further reasoned that if two legal provisions conflict, the more recent one abrogates the earlier.
• Since Section 375 does not criminalize non-consensual sex in marriage, the HC extended this protection to Section 377 as well. The ruling also cited the Supreme Court’s 2018 verdict, which decriminalized consensual homosexuality but retained Section 377 to penalize non-consensual “unnatural sex.”

Impact on Legal Recourse for Women

• Before this ruling, married women who experienced non-consensual sex from their husbands could at least invoke Section 377, which carried a sentence of up to 10 years in jail. Even if it did not result in conviction, it provided a legal avenue to initiate prosecution and seek protection.
• The HC ruling removes this recourse, reinforcing concerns raised when Section 377 was omitted from the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
• The omission of Section 377 in the BNS has drawn criticism from legal experts, as it removes legal protections for men and LGBTQIA+ individuals against sexual offenses.
• The Parliamentary Standing Committee reviewing the BNS before its enactment noted that Section 377 remained applicable in cases of non-consensual carnal intercourse. By removing it, the BNS does not provide legal protection for male, female, transgender individuals, or cases involving bestiality.

Gaps in Sexual Offense Laws Under BNS

• Under the BNS, sexual offenses fall under the chapter titled “Offences Against Women and Children,” primarily envisioning men as perpetrators and women as victims. This excludes men and LGBTQIA+ individuals from seeking justice under these provisions.
• The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, does criminalize offenses against transgender individuals, but it only carries a maximum punishment of two years, making it far weaker than other sexual offense laws.

Conclusion

• The ongoing legal and parliamentary debates indicate that the absence of a legal provision protecting individuals from non-consensual sexual offenses, regardless of gender or marital status, remains a significant concern in India’s legal framework.

6) Judicial Overreach: CJI’s Role in Executive Appointments

GS 2: Polity and Governance: Judicial restraint and preserving democratic integrity 

Why is it in the news?

• Recently, the Vice-President of India expressed concerns regarding judicial overreach, particularly questioning the Chief Justice of India’s (CJI) involvement in executive appointments.

Understanding Judicial Overreach

• Judicial overreach occurs when the judiciary exceeds its constitutional mandate and encroaches upon the functions of the legislature or the executive. It happens when courts make policy decisions or interfere in governance, which are traditionally within the executive’s and legislature’s domain.
• India’s constitutional framework is based on the principle of separation of powers to ensure checks and balances between the three branches of government.

Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Overreach

• Several former Chief Justices, including Ranjan Gogoi and P. Sathasivam, have warned against excessive judicial intervention. Article 50 of the Constitution mandates the separation of the judiciary from the executive.

Instances of Judicial Overreach

General Cases:

• Madras High Court’s ‘Vande Mataram’ Ruling (2017): Mandated the singing of ‘Vande Mataram’ in schools, government offices, and private institutions, raising concerns about interference in cultural practices.
• Supreme Court’s National Anthem Directive: Ordered cinemas to play the national anthem before movie screenings, which was perceived as excessive intervention in policymaking.
• Madras High Court’s Aadhaar- Social Media Linking Proposal (2019): Recommended linking Aadhaar with social media accounts to curb cybercrimes. This raised privacy concerns and was seen as judicial encroachment into policy formulation.

Judicial Overreach in Executive Appointments:

• Striking Down the NJAC (2015): The Supreme Court nullified the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), restoring the Collegium system for judicial appointments, despite NJAC being passed through the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act (2014).
• Intervention in Bureaucratic Appointments:

1) Prakash Singh Case (2006): Directed states to implement police reforms and regulate officer appointments, limiting executive discretion.

2) Alok Verma Case (2018): The Supreme Court overturned the government’s removal of the CBI Director, exerting judicial influence over executive decisions.

Judicial Appointment Systems in Other Countries

• United States: Judges are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, ensuring executive control over judicial selections.
• United Kingdom: Parliamentary supremacy restricts judicial interference.
• France & Germany: The judiciary has minimal involvement in executive decisions and appointments.

Consequences of Judicial Overreach

• Threat to Democratic Structure: Judicial interference in legislative or executive matters undermines the separation of powers (Article 50), which is crucial for democratic governance.
• Disruption of Constitutional Balance: Excessive judicial intervention distorts the equilibrium between the three branches of government, potentially making the judiciary a quasi-legislative or quasi-executive entity.
• Challenges in Policy Implementation: Court-mandated policies may lack proper legislative debate, leading to ineffective governance. The executive may struggle to enforce decisions imposed by the judiciary.
• Strained Inter-Governmental Relations: Frequent judicial intervention creates friction among government branches, fostering conflicts between the judiciary and the executive.

Recommendations by Committees

• Law Commission Reports: Advocated for a more transparent judicial appointment system.
• Punchhi Commission (2010): Suggested a balanced approach between judicial independence and executive involvement.

Way Forward

• Judicial Accountability Legislation: Implement mechanisms to ensure transparency and accountability in judicial decisions.
• Collegium System Reform: Introduce greater executive participation in judicial appointments.
• Judicial Self-Restraint: Courts should avoid interfering in policy matters beyond their jurisdiction.

Conclusion

• Judicial overreach remains a pressing concern, impacting governance and disrupting the balance of power. While judicial activism plays a crucial role in upholding rights, excessive intervention can weaken democratic institutions.
• Ensuring judicial restraint within constitutional limits is essential for preserving India’s democratic integrity.

7) Middle Class 2.0: Changing Employment Sectors in India and Its Challenge

GS 2: Society: Employment sector in India

Why is it in the news?

• India’s middle class was initially built on public sector employment. In 1995, the public sector employed 194.7 lakh people, while the organised private sector had only 80.6 lakh employees.
• By 2012, public sector jobs declined to 176.1 lakh, whereas private sector employment increased to 119.7 lakh. After economic liberalisation in 1991, this shift from public to private employment accelerated. However, official employment data after 2011-12 is scarce, with the last published figures available in the 2018-19 Economic Survey.

Growth of the IT Sector

• One key indicator of this transition is employment in Indian Railways, which fell from 16.5 lakh in 1990-91 to 11.9 lakh in 2022-23, despite a recent increase to 12.5 lakh. Central Public Sector Enterprises saw an even sharper decline from 22.2 lakh employees in 1990-91 to just 8.1 lakh in 2023-24.
• In contrast, the IT industry has witnessed a massive employment boom. TCS and Infosys, which had 45,714 and 36,750 employees in 2004-05, expanded to 4,48,464 and 2,42,371 employees, respectively, by 2019-20.
• The post-Covid digital transformation further accelerated this trend, with the top five IT firms—TCS, Infosys, Wipro, HCL Technologies, and Tech Mahindra—increasing their combined workforce from 11.5 lakh in March 2020 to over 16 lakhs in September 2022.
• As of December 2024, their total workforce stood at 15.34 lakh, surpassing both the Indian Railways’ workforce of 12.52 lakh and the 14.2 lakh personnel in India’s three defence services.

Banking Sector Transformation

• A similar transformation is evident in the banking sector. In 1991-92, scheduled commercial banks had 9.8 lakh employees, with public sector banks employing 8.5 lakh (87%). By 2020-21, public sector bank employment declined to 7.7 lakh, while private sector banks had 6 lakh employees.
• In 2022-23, private banks overtook public banks in employment for the first time. By 2023-24, private banks had 8.74 lakh employees, surpassing the 7.5 lakh in public sector banks.
• The dominance of private banks is even clearer at the individual level. HDFC Bank, with 2,13,527 employees, is close to the State Bank of India’s 2,32,296 workforce. ICICI Bank (1,41,009) and Axis Bank (1,04,332) both have more employees than Punjab National Bank (1,02,349).
• Similarly, Kotak Mahindra (77,923) and Bandhan Bank (75,748) have employee numbers comparable to Canara Bank (82,643), Union Bank of India (75,880), and Bank of Baroda (74,886).

India’s Employment Challenge

• Liberalisation created new industries and private sector job opportunities in IT, finance, healthcare, hospitality, logistics, media, and retail. This led to the rise of Middle Class 2.0 as the government-led Middle Class 1.0 shrank.
• However, most of the new jobs emerged in the services sector, while India failed to undergo structural transformation like China, where surplus agricultural labour shifted to manufacturing and high-productivity industries.
• According to the Periodic Labour Force Surveys (PLFS), agriculture’s share in employment declined from 64% in 1993-94 to 48.9% in 2011-12 and further to 42.5% in 2018-19. However, it rose again to 46.2% in 2023-24, indicating a lack of alternative employment.
• Manufacturing’s share grew marginally from 10.4% in 1993-94 to 12.6% in 2011-12 but dropped to 11.4% in 2023-24. The latest PLFS data shows manufacturing now lags behind construction (12%), trade, hotels & restaurants (12.2%), and other services (11.9%).
• While India has become a global services hub, many jobs are accessible only to the well-educated. White-collar roles in IT, finance, law, and medicine offer high salaries, but the majority of service sector jobs—such as gig work, security staffing, and retail—remain low-paying and informal.

The Gig Economy and Its Limitations

• Companies like Uber and Zomato highlight the rise of gig work. Uber has over 10 lakh drivers in India, while Zomato employed 4,80,000 food delivery workers and 1,45,000 quick-commerce riders in late 2024. Swiggy had 5,43,562 delivery partners during the same period.
• However, gig work offers limited financial security and does not ensure upward mobility into the middle class.

Conclusion

• India’s real employment challenge lies in generating stable, well-paying jobs outside the services sector.
• Without a strong manufacturing base, economic growth will continue to create opportunities mainly for highly educated professionals while leaving millions in low-paying, informal jobs.