Content
Radhakrishnan elected Vice-President of India
Poor NARI ranking exposes women safety gaps in Delhi
China digs in on ‘rare earth’, commands global market
Lessons for India: how Kerala is tackling rapid urbanisation
Governors must act as true guides and philosophers to States, says CJI Gavai
Could our everyday artificially intelligent chatbots become conscious?
Radhakrishnan elected Vice-President of India
Why in News
C.P. Radhakrishnan, Governor of Maharashtra and NDA nominee, was elected as the 17th Vice-President of India (2025).
He secured 452 first-preference votes, defeating the joint Opposition candidate Justice B. Sudershan Reddy, who got 300 votes.
98.2% turnout of the electoral college; cross-voting noted from the Opposition camp.
Relevance: GS II (Polity – Constitution, Executive, Parliament, President & Vice-President, Electoral processes, Articles 63–66, Judicial review)
Vice-President of India
Constitutional Provision:
Article 63: There shall be a Vice-President of India.
Article 64: Vice-President is the ex-officio Chairman of Rajya Sabha.
Article 65: Acts as President in case of vacancy, resignation, removal, or absence.
Election Process (Article 66):
Elected by an electoral college consisting of members of both Houses of Parliament (nominated members included).
Proportional Representation by means of Single Transferable Vote (STV); election held by secret ballot.
Value of vote is equal for all MPs (unlike Presidential election where vote value differs).
Eligibility (Article 66 & 84):
Citizen of India.
At least 35 years old.
Qualified for election as a member of Rajya Sabha.
Not hold any office of profit.
Term & Removal:
Term: 5 years, eligible for re-election.
Can resign to the President or be removed by a resolution of Rajya Sabha (effective if agreed by Lok Sabha).
Comparative Dimension
First Vice-President: Dr. S. Radhakrishnan (1952–1962).
Longest-serving VP: Hamid Ansari (2007–2017).
Precedent: Several Vice-Presidents (Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, Dr. Zakir Husain, V.V. Giri, R. Venkataraman, Shankar Dayal Sharma, K.R. Narayanan) later became Presidents.
Static Knowledge
Vice-President vs Speaker of Lok Sabha:
VP: Ex-officio Chairman of Rajya Sabha, elected by both Houses, does not vote except in case of tie.
Speaker: Elected only by Lok Sabha members, has casting vote in case of tie.
Removal Procedure Difference:
VP can be removed only by Rajya Sabha resolution agreed by Lok Sabha.
President can be impeached by both Houses with 2/3rd majority.
Important Case Law:
Mohd. Akbar vs Union of India (1969): VP’s election disputes are subject to judicial review by the Supreme Court.
Poor NARI ranking exposes women safety gaps in Delhi
Why in News
The National Annual Report & Index on Women’s Safety (NARI) 2025 revealed serious gaps in women’s safety in Delhi, 13 years after the 2012 Nirbhaya case.
Delhi ranked 28th out of 31 cities on the safety index, ahead only of Kolkata, Srinagar, and Ranchi.
Relevance: GS II (Polity – Fundamental Rights: Articles 14, 15, 21; Social Justice – Women safety, Nirbhaya Fund, Urban Governance, Law enforcement, Criminal Law), GS III (Social Issues – Gender equality, SDG 5, Urban development)
Basics
NARI Index 2025: Conducted by Pvalue Analytics, ideated with the National Commission for Women (NCW).
Survey Size: 12,770 women across 31 Indian cities.
Indicators: Women-friendly infrastructure, harassment experiences, policing, perceptions of safety (day vs. night).
Key Findings of NARI Report (2025)
Infrastructure gaps: 31% of Delhi women said women-friendly infrastructure was minimal/non-existent.
Safety perception: 8% unsafe during day; 35% unsafe at night.
Harassment:
National avg: 7% women faced harassment in public spaces.
Delhi: 12% (highest disparity).
61% of victims faced harassment more than twice → failure to deter repeat offenders.
Unsafe spaces:
Neighbourhood areas (34%) most unsafe.
Transport facilities (32%).
Deserted/unlit areas cited as key reasons for fear.
Demands from women:
51% → stronger policing.
17% → timely police action.
Overview
Constitutional & Legal Dimension
Article 14: Equality before law.
Article 15(3): State can make special provisions for women.
Article 21: Right to life includes dignity and safety.
Laws enacted post-2012:
Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 – expanded definitions of sexual offences.
Justice Verma Committee Report (2013) – recommended police reforms, faster trials, gender sensitisation.
Nirbhaya Fund (2013) – financial support for women’s safety initiatives.
Governance & Policing Dimension
Poor enforcement of CCTV coverage, street lighting, police patrolling.
Low trust in police action (timeliness, sensitivity).
Underutilisation of Nirbhaya Fund – CAG reports flag delays.
Need for smart policing (apps, helplines, gender desks in police stations).
Social Dimension
Patriarchal attitudes → normalisation of harassment.
Underreporting due to stigma, fear of reprisal.
Safety concerns reduce women’s mobility, education, and workforce participation.
Urban Planning Dimension
Lack of gender-sensitive urban infrastructure:
Poor street lighting.
Isolated bus stops, unsafe last-mile connectivity.
Inadequate public toilets for women.
Safe Cities Mission (2018) exists but patchy implementation.
Economic Dimension
Unsafe environments reduce women’s participation in the economy (India’s female LFPR ~37% in 2024).
Impacts productivity, urban growth, and SDG 5 (Gender Equality).
Comparative Perspective
Cities like Kohima, Visakhapatnam, Aizawl, Mumbai ranked better due to stronger community policing, civic culture, and infrastructure.
Delhi, despite being the national capital, lags behind, raising credibility concerns.
Static Knowledge
Schemes/Initiatives:
Nirbhaya Fund (2013).
Safe City Project under Nirbhaya Fund – being implemented in 8 metro cities.
One Stop Centres (OSCs) – for violence survivors.
Women Helpline (181).
SHE Teams (Telangana model).
Judicial Cases:
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) – workplace harassment guidelines.
Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) – acid attack regulations.
Nirbhaya case (2012–2020) – strengthened criminal law framework.
Way Forward
Urban Safety Audits: Gender-sensitive city planning (lighting, transport, toilets).
Policing Reforms: Increase women in police force (current ~11%), fast-track women’s safety cases.
Technology Integration: Panic apps, AI surveillance, predictive policing.
Community Participation: Involve RWAs, NGOs, student groups in monitoring.
Education & Sensitisation: Change in public attitudes through awareness campaigns.
Effective Utilisation of Nirbhaya Fund with transparent monitoring.
China digs in on ‘rare earth’, commands global market
Rare Earth Elements (REEs)
Definition: Group of 17 chemically similar metallic elements (15 lanthanides + scandium + yttrium).
Categories:
Light Rare Earths (LREEs): Lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, samarium, europium.
Heavy Rare Earths (HREEs): Gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium, lutetium, scandium, yttrium.
Exclusion: Promethium (radioactive, no mineable reserves).
Uses:
Clean energy: EV batteries, wind turbine magnets (NdFeB).
High-tech devices: Smartphones, hard drives, fibre optics, ceramics, phosphors.
Defence: Aerospace, radar, precision-guided weapons, stealth technology.
Relevance: GS III (Economy – Minerals & Resources, Critical minerals, Trade & Industrial Policy; Science & Technology – Clean energy tech, EVs, high-tech devices; Security – Strategic minerals, Defence applications; International Relations – India–China trade, MSP, global supply chains)
China’s Dominance
Reserves: Nearly 50% of world reserves (IEA).
Production: >60% of global production in last 5 years.
Refining: 92% of global refining capacity.
Exports: Largest exporter (≈30% of global demand).
Restrictions:
2023 – banned export of processing tech.
April 2025 – curbed export of 7 REEs (esp. for NdFeB magnets).
2025 interim measures – quotas + govt approval for trade.
Research Strength: 30% of global REE research papers (vs. U.S. & Japan ≤10%, India ≈6%).
Funding: $14 billion annually (2022–24) in mineral exploration (highest in decade).
India’s Position
Imports: 75%+ of rare earth imports from China (since 2021).
Reserves: Significant monazite sands (Odisha, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu).
Production: Limited; India contributes <2% of global REE output due to policy restrictions.
Institutions:
Indian Rare Earths Limited (IREL): PSU under DAE for mining/processing.
Atomic Minerals Directorate (AMD): Exploration of monazite and other RE-bearing minerals.
Challenges:
Monazite contains thorium → falls under Atomic Energy Act, limiting private sector participation.
Processing & refining bottlenecks → India exports raw ores but imports refined products.
Overview
Strategic & Security Dimension
Rare earths are “critical minerals” → essential for Atmanirbhar Bharat in defence & clean energy.
Over-dependence on China creates strategic vulnerability (supply disruptions, price manipulation).
U.S.–China tensions show weaponisation of REEs as a geopolitical tool.
Economic Dimension
Global clean energy transition (EVs, wind) → REE demand projected to triple by 2040 (IEA).
India’s electronics & EV targets (30% EV penetration by 2030) → rising REE demand.
Import dependence threatens current account stability.
Technological Dimension
Refining & separation of REEs is highly complex, polluting, and capital-intensive.
China’s dominance lies not just in reserves, but mastery of refining tech.
India lags in R&D, recycling, and processing capacity.
Environmental Dimension
REE mining/refining causes radioactive & chemical waste → ecological concerns.
Need for green processing methods, circular economy (REE recycling from e-waste).
Political & Global Dimension
Rare earths are now at the heart of critical mineral diplomacy.
U.S., Japan, EU, Australia diversifying supply chains via alliances (e.g., Minerals Security Partnership – MSP).
India is part of MSP (2023) → chance to collaborate on exploration, refining, and supply chain resilience.
Social Dimension
Local communities near REE-rich coasts (Kerala, Odisha) face livelihood & displacement issues from mining.
Balancing resource exploitation with social/environmental safeguards is key.
Ethical Dimension
Resource nationalism vs. equitable access debate.
Data parallels with “resource curse” → risk of exploitation without inclusive growth.
Way Forward for India
Policy Reforms: Amend Atomic Energy Act to allow private/foreign participation in non-nuclear REEs.
Exploration: Accelerate surveys under NMET (National Mineral Exploration Trust).
Processing Tech: Invest in refining & separation technologies (AIIMS + CSIR collaborations).
Recycling: Promote urban mining of e-waste (rare earth recovery).
Strategic Stockpiling: Build reserves for critical sectors (defence, EVs, power).
Global Partnerships: Deepen cooperation via MSP, Quad, and bilateral deals with Australia, U.S., Japan.
Static Knowledge
IEA Definition: REEs = 17 metals, critical for clean energy transition.
India’s Monazite Reserves: ~12 million tonnes, mostly in beach sands.
Institutions: IREL, AMD, BARC’s rare earth metallurgy division.
Global Context: REEs included in U.S. “Critical Minerals List” & EU “Strategic Raw Materials Act (2023)”.
Lessons for India: how Kerala is tackling rapid urbanisation
Kerala Urban Policy Commission (KUPC)
Set up: December 2023 by Kerala Cabinet.
Report submitted: March 30, 2025 (2,359 pages).
Nature: First State-level Urban Commission in India.
Mandate: To prepare a 25-year urban roadmap tailored to Kerala’s unique “rurban” context (villages merging into towns, high climate risks).
Why needed:
Kerala urbanisation > national average; projected 80% urban by 2050.
Frequent climate disasters: 2018–19 floods, recurring landslides, coastal erosion.
Mismatch between national urban frameworks and Kerala’s sub-national realities.
Relevance: GS II (Polity – State governance, 73rd & 74th Amendments, Urban Local Bodies, Municipal governance), GS III (Infrastructure – Urbanisation, Disaster management, Climate-resilient planning, Municipal finance, SDG 11)
Key Recommendations of KUPC
Climate & Risk-Aware Planning
Mandatory hazard zoning: floods, landslides, coastal inundation.
Integration of LIDAR, satellite, tide gauges, real-time data.
Digital Data Revolution
A Data Observatory at Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA).
Dashboards with community-generated indicators.
Crowd-sourced inputs: fishermen’s experiences, bazaar vendors’ mobility issues.
Finance Empowerment
Municipal Bonds: Thiruvananthapuram, Kochi, Kozhikode to issue; pooled bonds for smaller towns.
Green Fees: Levies on eco-sensitive projects.
Climate Insurance: Parametric model for quick disaster payouts.
Governance Recalibration
City Cabinets led by mayors, replacing bureaucratic inertia.
Specialist municipal cells (climate, waste, mobility, law).
Jnanashree Programme: Recruit youth technocrats for urban governance.
Place-Based Economic Revival
Thrissur-Kochi → FinTech hub.
Thiruvananthapuram-Kollam → Knowledge corridor.
Kozhikode → City of literature.
Palakkad & Kasaragod → Smart-industrial zones.
Commons, Culture, and Care
Revive wetlands, waterways, heritage zones.
City health councils for migrants, students, gig workers.
Overview
Constitutional & Governance Dimension
Falls under State List (urban development, local government – 7th Schedule).
Strengthens 73rd & 74th Constitutional Amendments: empowerment of municipalities.
Brings in decentralised planning + climate governance.
Administrative Dimension
Moves from reactive disaster management → proactive resilience planning.
Enhances municipal autonomy with financial tools.
Reduces dependence on centrally driven schemes (e.g., Smart Cities Mission).
Climate & Environmental Dimension
Urban planning integrates hazard mapping and resilience.
Green levies + insurance → internalising climate risk.
Unique: embeds resilience as a core pillar, not an add-on.
Economic & Financial Dimension
Municipal bonds + pooled financing → fiscal autonomy for local bodies.
Encourages private & community investment in climate-safe infrastructure.
Supports Atmanirbhar Bharat Urban Finance Agenda.
Technological & Data Dimension
Urban Data Observatory: first state-driven “living intelligence engine”.
Integrates satellite, GIS, LIDAR, crowd-sourced citizen data.
Facilitates evidence-based policymaking.
Social Dimension
Protects vulnerable groups: migrants, gig workers, women.
Blends lived experience with formal planning (e.g., fisherfolk voices in hazard maps).
Recognises Kerala’s rurban identity → continuity of village–town–city.
Political & Ethical Dimension
Democratizes urban governance by empowering mayors, youth technocrats.
Upholds principles of participatory planning.
Ensures inclusivity, reducing elite capture of urban development.
Value Addition
74th Amendment Act, 1992 → Constitutional status to Urban Local Bodies (ULBs).
NITI Aayog’s SDG Index → Kerala ranks high in SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities & Communities).
Urban Finance Tools in India:
Municipal bonds (Pune, Ahmedabad were pioneers).
Pooled finance model → Tamil Nadu Urban Development Fund (TNUDF).
Climate-Urban Nexus:
IPCC AR6 stresses urban vulnerability in coastal & hilly states like Kerala.
India’s National Urban Policy Framework (2018) had climate mentions, but not as central as KUPC.
Why KUPC is Unique & Lessons for Other States
First state-level urban commission → tailored to sub-national context.
Integrates data, finance, governance, and identity into one framework.
Template for others: combine technical + social knowledge, empower local bodies, mandate resilience in planning.
Governors must act as true guides and philosophers to States, says CJI Gavai
Why in News
The Supreme Court’s five-judge Presidential Reference Bench, headed by CJI B.R. Gavai, is hearing whether timelines can be imposed on Governors and the President for deciding on Bills under Articles 200 & 201.
Kerala and other opposition-ruled States highlighted the indefinite delay of assent to Bills by Governors, calling it unconstitutional and adversarial.
Court observed that Governors must act as “true guides and philosophers” to State governments, ensuring a collaborative federal relationship.
Relevance: GS II (Polity – Centre–State relations, Federalism, Role of Governors, Articles 163, 200–201, Presidential Reference under Article 143, Judicial review, Constitutional morality, Sarkaria & Punchhi Commission recommendations)
Basics
Articles 200 & 201:
Article 200: Governor may assent, withhold assent, or reserve the Bill for President’s consideration.
Article 201: President may assent, withhold assent, or return the Bill.
No explicit timeline prescribed in the Constitution.
Presidential Reference (Art. 143): Allows President to seek SC’s advisory opinion on questions of law or constitutional interpretation.
Governor’s Role in Legislature:
Nominal head of the State.
Part of State Legislature (like President at the Centre).
Expected to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers (Article 163).
Governor’s Discretion: Limited to certain situations (e.g., hung assembly, reserving Bills for President, recommending President’s Rule).
Overview
Constitutional Dimension
Right to legislate is with the elected legislature, not the Governor.
Unreasonable delay violates Article 14 (fairness) and undermines parliamentary democracy.
Indefinite pendency → undermines basic structure: federalism, democracy.
SC in Shamsher Singh (1974): Governor must act on aid & advice except in exceptional circumstances.
Judicial Dimension
April 2024 SC ruling: Fixed a 3-month timeline for Governors/President on Bills.
Debate: Should SC read timelines into Articles 200 & 201 (like substantive due process into Article 21)?
Risk: Court-imposed timelines could trigger fresh litigation (as in medical admission cases).
Federal Dimension
Conflicts mostly in opposition-ruled States (Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Punjab, Telangana, West Bengal).
Seen as Governors acting as agents of the Union, undermining cooperative federalism.
Creates perception of dyarchy (dual authority in States).
Administrative Dimension
Indefinite delay in assent disrupts governance and welfare measures.
Kerala cited 8 Bills pending with Governor for 7–23 months.
Lack of timelines leads to policy paralysis and undermines public trust.
Political Dimension
Disputes reflect the Centre–State political tussle.
In BJP-ruled States, Bills get assented faster; opposition-ruled States face hurdles.
Raises concerns about neutrality of Governors.
Ethical & Democratic Dimension
Democracy demands legislative supremacy of elected representatives over unelected authorities.
Delays harm citizens’ welfare → ethical question of accountability.
Governor should be a constitutional statesman, not a political actor.
Comparative Perspective
UK: Royal Assent is a formality; refusal not practiced since early 18th century.
Canada & Australia: Governors-General largely act as rubber stamps on advice of ministers.
India: Retains vestiges of colonial discretionary powers → need for reform.
Value Addition
Constituent Assembly Debates: Dr. Ambedkar clarified Governor is not an independent authority, but bound by advice of ministers.
Sarkaria Commission (1988) & Punchhi Commission (2010): Recommended limiting Governor’s discretion, ensuring neutrality, and specifying timelines.
ARC Reports: Suggested reforms in appointment, tenure, and role of Governors to prevent misuse.
Judgments:
Shamsher Singh (1974) – Governor is a constitutional head, bound by aid & advice.
Nabam Rebia (2016) – Governor cannot act as an “all-pervading super-constitutional authority”.
Way Forward
Specify timelines: Clear constitutional/legislative mandate (e.g., 3 months).
Governor reforms: Neutral appointments, fixed tenure, adherence to constitutional morality.
Judicial clarity: Balanced approach → prevent misuse without judicial overreach.
Strengthen cooperative federalism: Build trust between Centre and States.
Could our everyday artificially intelligent chatbots become conscious?
Why in News?
Rapid proliferation of chatbots across customer service, healthcare, education, and entertainment has raised debates about whether advanced AI systems can achieve consciousness.
Ethical dilemmas (trust, emotional attachment, liability, and job displacement) are emerging.
The 2022 Google LaMDA controversy (Blake Lemoine claiming AI sentience) highlighted the sensitivity of the issue.
Relevance: GS III (Science & Technology – AI/ML, Emerging technologies, Neuromorphic computing, AI ethics), GS IV (Ethics – Responsible AI, Ethical dilemmas, Governance frameworks), GS II (Governance – AI regulation, NITI Aayog initiatives, UNESCO AI ethics framework)
Basics
Chatbots: Software applications using AI/ML (esp. Large Language Models – LLMs) to simulate human-like conversations.
Consciousness:
Phenomenal consciousness – subjective “what it feels like” experiences (pain, joy, awareness).
Access consciousness – ability to access and use information for reasoning/action.
The ELIZA Effect (1966): People tend to anthropomorphize chatbots, attributing emotions/intent to algorithmic outputs.
Core Debate: Chatbots simulate intelligent conversation but do not experience it.
Overview
Philosophical & Cognitive Dimension
For consciousness: If human consciousness emerges from physical brain processes, theoretically, advanced computational models could mimic it.
Against consciousness:
No subjective experience (qualia).
No intentionality (no goals beyond programmed tasks).
No self-awareness (they simulate “I” but do not experience it).
Lack of embodiment (no sensorimotor engagement with the world).
Chinese Room Argument (John Searle, 1980) – machines manipulate symbols but don’t understand meaning → strong case against machine consciousness.
Technological Dimension
Current chatbots (GPT, LaMDA, etc.) rely on statistical pattern recognition → not true comprehension.
They generate probabilistic word predictions, not conscious thought.
Limitation: lack of memory, emotions, beliefs, or continuity of self.
Ethical Dimension
Over-trust in chatbots (esp. in healthcare, legal advice) may cause harm.
Emotional attachment risks psychological manipulation.
Accountability issues: Who is liable if a chatbot provides harmful/bias-laden output?
Asimov’s Laws of Robotics – attempt to govern ethical AI behaviour.
Social Dimension
Increased anthropomorphism → risk of users mistaking chatbots for sentient beings.
May deepen loneliness or cause dependency in vulnerable groups.
Psychological concerns: emotional manipulation, echo chambers.
Legal & Governance Dimension
No legal framework yet on “machine personhood.”
Question: If AI ever becomes conscious (hypothetically), what rights would it have?
Current AI governance debates (EU AI Act, UNESCO’s AI Ethics Framework, India’s NITI Aayog AI for All).
Economic Dimension
Job displacement concerns in customer service, education, content creation.
Simultaneously, chatbots improve efficiency, reduce costs, and expand access.
Dual challenge: protecting workers + harnessing productivity.
Security Dimension
Deepfakes, misinformation, and malicious chatbot deployment are growing threats.
Consciousness is not the issue here → misuse is.
UPSC GS III (Internal Security) – disinformation and AI misuse.
The Case Against AI Consciousness
Current chatbots are input-output machines → sophisticated but mechanistic.
No scientific proof of AI consciousness.
Most experts caution against anthropomorphizing.
Future Possibilities
Some argue advanced neuromorphic computing or quantum AI might mimic neural substrates → raising new debates.
But consciousness may require more than computation → possibly biological substrates.
If achieved, raises dilemmas on AI rights, ethical treatment, and redefining “personhood.”
Conclusion
Chatbots are not conscious beings; they are advanced statistical systems.
The debate reflects technological optimism, philosophical inquiry, and ethical caution.
For UPSC:
Focus on governance frameworks.
Ethical deployment of AI.
Distinction between simulation and consciousness.