Contents

1. Pension Reforms in India
2. Swap app mandates for digital literacy
3. Draft ISI Bill, 2025
4. Brain-Stem Death (BSD)
5. National intelligence grid gains traction as Central agencies, police scour for information
6. Filaments

---

Pension Reforms in India

---

WHY IN NEWS ?

• India’s elderly population (60+) is 153 million today, projected to reach 347 million by 2050.
• Over 88% of senior citizens work in the informal sector with no assured pension or social security.
• Renewed focus due to:
  • Expansion and redesign of Atal Pension Yojana and National Pension System,
  • Launch of e-SHRAM portal,
  • Labour Codes reform redefining “wages” for pension calculations.
• LASI Survey (2017–18) and Comprehensive Annual Modular Survey (2022–23) reveal:
  • 42% of people above 55 unaware of NPS.
  • 63% of elderly lack basic internet usage skills.

Relevance :

GS Paper II – Governance & Social Justice

• Welfare schemes for the vulnerable sections (elderly, informal workers)
• Social security architecture: IGNOAPS, NPS, APY, e-SHRAM
• Role of Labour Codes in redefining wage-linked social protection
• Digital exclusion and governance delivery gaps
• Institutional mechanisms for old-age welfare

GS Paper I – Indian Society

• Demographic transition and population ageing
• Informalisation of labour and its social consequences
• Gendered vulnerability in old-age employment

GS Paper III – Indian Economy

• Household savings and capital market deepening
• Pension funds as long-term infrastructure financing source
• Fiscal sustainability of OPS vs contributory pensions

BASICS: WHAT IS A PENSION SYSTEM?

• Pension = Regular post-retirement income for old-age security.
• Two broad types:
  • Social Assistance (Non-contributory) → Government-funded.
  • Contributory Pension → Individual + employer/government contribution.

INDIA’S DEMOGRAPHIC & STRUCTURAL CHALLENGE

• Rapid ageing + Informalisation:
  • Informal sector share among 55+:
    • Women: 75.6%
    • Men: 68%
• Consequence:
  • No employer pensions.
  • No assured retirement income.
  • Continued old-age labour → poverty risk + dignity deficit.

FIRST PHASE: WELFARE-BASED SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme (1995)

• Target: BPL elderly (65+)
• Nature: Non-contributory
• Role:
  • First national effort to assure minimum old-age income security.
  • Expanded coverage and benefit levels over time.
• Limitation:
  • Very low pension amount.
  • No linkage to savings or investment behaviour.

Old Pension Scheme (Pre-2004)

• For government employees.
• Defined benefit; fully state-funded.
• Problem:
  • Heavy fiscal burden.
  • Unsustainable with rising life expectancy.

SECOND PHASE: SHIFT TO CONTRIBUTORY PENSIONS

National Pension System (2004)

• Replaced OPS for new recruits.
• Features:
  • Defined contribution.
  • Market-linked returns.
  • Applies to:
    • Government employees.
    • Corporate sector workers.
• Recent reform: NPS 2.0
  • 100% equity option.
  • Multiple Scheme Framework (MSF).
  • Targets young, high-risk investors.

Atal Pension Yojana (2015–16)

• For informal sector workers (18–40 years).
• Features:
  • Monthly/quarterly/half-yearly contribution.
  • Government guarantees minimum pension.
• Behavioural impact:
  • Encourages formal savings culture.
  • Improves retirement planning in low-income groups.

THIRD PHASE: BRIDGING FORMAL–INFORMAL DIVIDE

e-SHRAM portal

• National database of informal workers.
• Functions:
  • Registration for welfare schemes.
  • Eligibility discovery.
  • Attempted integration into formal social security.

Challenges:

• Aadhaar–bank–mobile linkage errors.
• Digital exclusion:
  • 63% elderly cannot use the internet.
• Risk of exclusion errors > inclusion gains.

ROLE OF LABOUR CODES IN PENSION SECURITISATION

• Uniform definition of wages:
  • Basic pay ≥ 50% of total earnings.
• Direct impact:
  • Higher:
    • PF contribution,
    • Gratuity,
    • Pension base.
• Closes employer strategy of inflating allowances to reduce social security burden.

POLICY EVOLUTION: SEQUENTIAL LOGIC

• Stage 1 – Welfare Protection:
  • IGNOAPS, OPS.
• Stage 2 – Financial Behaviour Change:
  • NPS, NPS 2.0.
• Stage 3 – Informal Inclusion:
  • APY, e-SHRAM.
• Current Direction:
  • Data-driven targeting + contributory security.

CRITICAL GAPS

• Awareness deficit:
  • 42% above 55 unaware of NPS.
• Coverage vs Access mismatch:
  • Availability ≠ Effective utilisation.
• Digital divide:
  • Elderly excluded from portal-based access.
• Pension adequacy:
  • APY pension slabs insufficient for inflation-adjusted living.

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL SYSTEM

• Promotes:
  • Long-term household savings.
  • Capital market deepening.
  • Reduced old-age dependency ratio pressure over time.
• Shifts India:
  • From welfare-centric pension state
  • To participatory, market-linked social security state.

---

Swap app mandates for digital literacy

---

WHY IN NEWS ?

• The Union government withdrew its directive to mandatorily preload the ‘Sanchar Saathi’ app on every new smartphone after:
  • Civil society backlash
  • Political opposition
  • Objections from digital rights groups
• The controversy sits at the intersection of:
  • Exploding cyber fraud
  • Expanding state surveillance capacity
  • Right to privacy jurisprudence

Relevance

GS Paper II – Polity & Governance

• Right to Privacy under Article 21 and Puttaswamy doctrine
• Limits of executive power without statutory backing
• Surveillance vs civil liberties
• Citizen–State trust in digital governance

GS Paper III – Internal Security & Cybersecurity

• Cyber fraud ecosystem and telecom security
• Digital arrest scams, OTP frauds, financial cybercrime
• Platform regulation and behavioural cybersecurity

GS Paper IV – Ethics in Public Administration

• Informed consent and digital coercion
• Surveillance ethics vs public safety
• Technological paternalism vs citizen autonomy

WHAT IS SANCHAR SAATHI?

• A telecom safety platform for:
  • Reporting spam and fraud
  • Blocking lost/stolen devices
  • Checking mobile number misuse
• Operates through:
  • Web portals
  • SMS
  • USSD codes
• Linked with the Central Equipment Identity Register (CEIR) system.

WHAT DID THE WITHDRAWN DIRECTIVE REQUIRE?

• Mandatory pre-installation on all new smartphones
• App:
  • Could not be uninstalled
  • Was visible on first boot
  • Would receive over-the-air updates
  • Reportedly sought access to:
    • Phone
    • SMS
    • Location
• Effect:
  • Transformed a voluntary safety tool into a system-level state surveillance interface

CONSTITUTIONAL TEST: K.S. PUTTASWAMY (2017)

Under K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India, any restriction on privacy must pass:

1. Legality – Backed by law
2. Necessity – No less intrusive alternative
3. Proportionality – Least restrictive method

Why the directive failed:

• Necessity failed:
  • Same objectives already achieved via:
    • Sanchar Saathi portals
    • USSD codes
    • SMS reporting
    • 1909 spam helpline
• Proportionality failed:
  • Permanent background access ≫ limited, on-demand verification
• Legality weak:
  • No detailed parliamentary statute authorising forced installation

CYBER FRAUD CONTEXT: SCALE OF THE PROBLEM

• Interpol estimate (2023):
  • $1 trillion global loss due to online financial fraud
• India witnessing growth in:
  • “Digital arrest” scams
  • Investment frauds
  • OTP-based account takeovers

Key constitutional principle:

• “Serious problem” ≠ automatic justification for mass surveillance

EXISTING INDIAN ANTI-FRAUD ECOSYSTEM (ALREADY IN PLACE)

• Sanchar Saathi + CEIR portals
• Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ‘DND’ app
• National 1909 short code for spam/fraud

Privacy Warning from DND Experience:

• Earlier versions required access to:
  • Call logs
  • SMS data
• Apple blocked it for violating privacy safeguards.
• Only after system-level redesign was limited access allowed.
• Sanchar Saathi mandate repeated this mistake at a much larger scale.

CYBERSECURITY RISK OF “PRIVILEGED APPS”

• A privileged, non-removable app:
  • Becomes a high-value target for hackers
  • If compromised:
    • Enables lateral movement across millions of devices
• Cybersecurity research consensus:
  • Widely deployed system components = single-point failure risks

SURVEILLANCE STATE VS BEHAVIOURAL CYBERSECURITY

• Digital scams succeed through:
  • Fear
  • False authority
  • Psychological manipulation
• Pure technological surveillance:
  • Does not eliminate human vulnerability
  • Risks normalising permanent monitoring

Kenya Study (2023):

• Generic scam warnings:
  • Did not improve scam detection ability
• Behaviour change must be:
  • Continuous
  • Culturally adapted
  • Behaviour-specific

INDIA’S EXISTING BEHAVIOURAL CYBER AWARENESS MODELS

• Reserve Bank of India e-BAAT outreach
• ‘RBI Kehta Hai’ mass media safety campaign
• Chhattisgarh cybersecurity awareness vans
• Telangana ‘Fraud Ka Full Stop’ campaign
  • Reported 8% decline in cybercrime
• Police-bank mobile kiosks in:
  • Tiruchi, Tamil Nadu
  • Other urban centres

CORE GOVERNANCE ISSUE

• Shift from:
  • “What’s there to hide?”
    to
  • “What’s there to see — and how is it being used?”
• Citizens treated as:
  • Passive surveillance subjects
    Instead of:
  • Active cybersecurity participants

POLICY WAY FORWARD: THREE-PILLAR MODEL

1. Platform & Network Regulation

• Mandatory obligations on:
  • Telecom firms
  • Banks
  • FinTech platforms
• For:
  • Pattern detection
  • Real-time fraud blocking
  • Large-value transaction traceability

2. Robust Citizen Reporting & Redress

• Seamless:
  • 1930 helpline
  • App-based reporting
  • Time-bound grievance disposal

3. Sustained Digital Public Education

• Not slogan-based
• Must be:
  • Continuous
  • Local-language
  • Behaviour-specific
  • Community-led

---

Draft ISI Bill, 2025

---

 WHY IN NEWS ?

• On September 25, 2025, the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) released the Draft Indian Statistical Institute Bill, 2025.
• The Bill seeks to:
  • Convert ISI from a “registered society” into a “statutory body corporate”.
• The move triggered:
  • Protests by students and faculty
  • Opposition by political parties (TMC, CPI-M)
  • A letter by D. Ravikumar demanding withdrawal.

Relevance

GS Paper II – Polity, Governance & Federalism

• Autonomy of Institutions of National Importance
• Statutory bodies vs registered societies
• Centre–State relations and cooperative federalism
• Accountability vs independence dilemma

WHAT IS THE INDIAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE (ISI)?

• Founded in December 1931, Kolkata by P.C. Mahalanobis.
• Registered originally under:
  • Societies Registration Act, 1860
  • Later under West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961.
• Declared an Institution of National Importance (INI) under:
  • Indian Statistical Institute Act, 1959
• Academic spread:
  • ~1,200 students
  • 6 centres across India
  • Disciplines: Statistics, Mathematics, Economics, Computer Science, Operations Research, Cryptology, Quality Management.

ISI’S STRATEGIC SIGNIFICANCE TO INDIA

• Backbone of India’s statistical governance architecture.
• Birthplace of:
  • National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) → foundation of India’s official data ecosystem.
• Key contribution:
  • Mahalanobis Model → Heavy-industry based planning.
• Global academic legacy:
  • C.R. Rao
  • S.R.S. Varadhan (Fields Medalist)
• Often linked with the Bengal Renaissance and scientific institution-building.

WHAT DOES THE 2025 BILL PROPOSE?

(A) Change in Legal Status

• From:
  • Registered Society
• To:
  • Statutory Body Corporate

(B) New Governance Architecture

• Power concentrated in:
  • Board of Governors (BoG) under Section 15.
• Earlier structure:
  • 33-member Council
  • 10 from ISI community (8 elected faculty, 1 worker, 1 scientific worker)
• Under 2025 Bill:
  • Zero elected ISI representatives
  • Dominated by Union Government nominees

(C) Funding Model Shift

• Section 29: “Power to generate revenue”
  • Student fees
  • Consultancy
  • Sponsored research
• Signals a shift towards corporate-style funding model

WHY ARE ACADEMICIANS PROTESTING?

1. Loss of Institutional Autonomy

• Society model allowed:
  • Independent Memorandum & Bye-laws
  • Faculty-driven governance
• Statutory corporate model:
  • Direct state control via BoG

2. Political Interference in Appointments

• All appointments routed through:
  • Union Government-controlled BoG
• Fear of:
  • Ideological capture
  • Loyalty-based hiring over academic merit

3. Threat to Basic Research

• ISI’s strength:
  • Long-gestation, non-commercial basic research
• Corporate funding logic:
  • Favours short-term, revenue-generating projects
  • Risks marginalising pure mathematics & statistics

4. Federalism Concerns

• Bypasses:
  • West Bengal Societies Registration Act
• Seen as violating:
  • Spirit of cooperative federalism

5. Democratic Deficit

• Over 1,500 academicians wrote to Rao Inderjit Singh (MoS, MoSPI).
• Students formed:
  • Human chain protest in North Kolkata (B.T. Road campus).

GOVERNMENT’S POSITION

• Objective:
  • Make ISI a “world-leading institute” by its centenary in 2031.
• Justification:
  • Four review committees examined ISI.
  • Most recent chaired by R.A. Mashelkar (2020).
• Recommendations:
  • Governance reforms
  • Academic expansion
  • Global competitiveness

CORE POLICY DILEMMA

Issue	Government View	Academicians’ View
Legal Status	Strong statutory backing	Society model protects autonomy
Governance	Centralised professional management	Democratic academic self-rule
Funding	Diversification via market	Commercialisation of research
Appointments	Uniform national control	Political interference risk

CONSTITUTIONAL & GOVERNANCE DIMENSIONS

• Article 19(1)(g): Academic freedom & professional autonomy
• Federalism: Central law overriding state-registered societies
• Institutional independence: Similar debates seen in:
  • Universities
  • Regulatory bodies
  • Research councils

Deeper risk:

• Shift from knowledge institutions as public goods
• To knowledge institutions as corporate entities

LIKELY POLITICAL TRAJECTORY

• Opposition parties:
  • TMC
  • CPI(M)
• Have vowed to:
  • Oppose Bill if tabled in Parliament.
• Indicates:
  • Possible Standing Committee scrutiny
  • Legislative confrontation ahead

BROADER IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIA

• Affects:
  • Credibility of India’s statistical system
  • Independence of official economic data
  • Global trust in Indian research institutions
• Comes at a time when:
  • Data transparency and methodological credibility are already under scrutiny.

---

Brain-Stem Death (BSD)

---

WHY IN NEWS ?

• Renewed debate on legal ambiguities in Brain-Stem Death (BSD) certification under the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994.
• India’s deceased organ donation rate remains critically low:
  • India (2023): 0.77 donors per million
  • Spain (2023): 49.38 donors per million
• ~5 lakh Indians die annually while waiting for organ transplants.
• Demand rising to:
  • Expand the donor pool
  • Remove legal-bureaucratic bottlenecks
  • Clarify death certification & consent protocols

Relevance :

GS Paper III – Health Sector & Human Resource Development

• Public health system capacity: ICU infrastructure & trained transplant coordinators
• Organ donation as a resource optimisation strategy in healthcare
• Demand–supply gap in transplants and mortality burden
• Health system efficiency and end-of-life care management
• Medical technology, ventilator dependence and ICU rationing

WHAT IS ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION LAW IN INDIA?

• Governed by:
  • Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994
• Covers two types of transplants:

(A) Deceased Donor Transplant

• Organs retrieved from a person with certified Brain-Stem Death (BSD).
• Heart may still beat with ventilator support.
• Law legally recognises BSD as death.

(B) Living Donor Transplant

• Organ removed from a healthy living person.
• Needs legal sanction because:
  • Doctors are otherwise prohibited from removing healthy organs.

WHAT IS BRAIN-STEM DEATH (BSD)?

• Defined under the 1994 Act as:
  • “Permanent and irreversible cessation of all functions of the brain-stem.”
• Brain-stem controls:
  • Breathing
  • Consciousness
  • Vital reflexes
• BSD = irreversible biological death, even if heart is artificially supported.

WHY INDIA’S ORGAN TRANSPLANT PERFORMANCE IS POOR

• Extreme shortage of:
  • ICU infrastructure
  • BSD-certified hospitals
  • Trained transplant coordinators
• Major bottlenecks:
  • Legal confusion
  • Bureaucratic controls
  • Family consent delays
  • Low public awareness
• Result:
  • Massive organ-demand vs supply gap

KEY LEGAL CONFUSIONS AROUND BSD

Q1. Is BSD legally equivalent to cardiac death?

Yes, under the 1994 Act:

• “Deceased person” includes:
  • Death by brain-stem death
  • Death by cardio-pulmonary failure
• Core legal phrase:
  • “Permanent disappearance of all evidence of life”
• Therefore:
  • BSD has full legal recognition as death

Q2. Should life support continue if family refuses organ donation?

• Law:
  • Only defines death
  • Does not dictate post-death hospital actions
• Ethical-legal position:
  • If no consent:
    • Life support may be continued on family request
    • But death certificate time is final
  • If consent exists:
    • Life support must continue temporarily to preserve organs

Q3. Are two death certificates required?

• Current practice:
  • BSD certificate issued first
  • Fresh death certificate issued after organ harvest
• Legal position:
  • Unnecessary duplication
  • BSD certificate alone is sufficient for legal death registration

LINK WITH DEATH REGISTRATION LAW

• Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969
• Definition of death:
  • “Permanent disappearance of all evidence of life.”
• Same core definition as 1994 Act.
• Form 4 (Death Registration Form):
  • Separates:
    • Cause of death
    • Mode of death (heart failure, respiratory failure, etc.)
• BSD is interpreted as:
  • Respiratory failure due to brain-stem damage
• Conclusion:
  • No new amendment needed to register BSD legally.

MAJOR LEGAL CONTRADICTION NEEDING AMENDMENT

Section 14(1) of 1994 Act:

• BSD certification & organ retrieval allowed only in registered hospitals.

Rule 5(1) & 5(2):

• BSD certification mandatory in every hospital with ICU, including:
  • Non-transplant hospitals

Provision	What it Allows
Section 14	Only registered hospitals
Rule 5	All ICU hospitals

Resulting Contradiction:

This legally blocks universal BSD identification.

CRITICAL NEED FOR LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT

Reform Required:

• Allow BSD certification and organ retrieval in all ICU-equipped hospitals.
• Restrict actual transplant surgery to:
  • Registered transplant centres only.

Why Essential:

• BSD commonly occurs in:
  • Trauma
  • Stroke
  • Brain haemorrhage cases
• Most such deaths occur in:
  • District hospitals
  • Medical colleges
• Current law artificially shrinks the donor pool.

BUREAUCRATIC BOTTLENECKS IN BSD CERTIFICATION

Problem 1: Doctor Approval by Appropriate Authority (AA)

• Form 10 requires:
  • 2 of the 4 certifying doctors to be AA-approved
• Issues:
  • No special qualification criteria
  • Cumbersome approval process
  • Doctors reluctant to apply
• Effect:
  • BSD certification gets delayed or avoided
• Reform Needed:
  • Allow any registered specialist medical practitioner to certify BSD.

Problem 2: No “Time of Death” in Form 10

• A death certificate without time = legally incomplete
• Kerala Government (2020) solved this by:
  • Defining time of death as:
    • “Time when arterial pCO₂ reaches target value in second apnoea test”
• Other States still lack this clarity.
• Result:
  • Legal uncertainty in death registration.

CONSENT PROCESS: LEGAL SEQUENCING

When should consent be sought?

• As per law:
  • First → BSD must be diagnosed & certified
  • Then only → Family approached for consent

Legal tools:

• Form 8 (Declaration & Consent Form):
  • Starts with:
    • “Has been declared brain-stem dead/dead…”
  • Confirms:
    • Authorisation for organ removal after BSD certification

Consent before BSD certification is legally incorrect.

POLICY IMPORTANCE OF CLEAR BSD LAW

• Addresses three national priorities:
  • Public health → Organ availability
  • Medical ethics → End-of-life clarity
  • Resource efficiency → ICU & ventilator optimisation
• Prevents:
  • Indefinite ventilator occupation
  • Medico-legal hesitation
  • Family-doctor conflict

---

National intelligence grid gains traction as Central agencies, police scour for information

---

WHY IN NEWS ?

• National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) is now handling ~45,000 data access requests per month.
• At the 2024 DGPs’ Conference in Raipur, chaired by Narendra Modi, States were asked to scale up NATGRID usage in all investigations.
• Union Home Ministry directed States to liberally use NATGRID.
• Access expanded:
  • From 10 Central agencies
  • To Superintendent of Police (SP)-rank officers in States.
• Comes amid:
  • 20.41 lakh cybersecurity incidents in 2024 (highest since 2020).

Relevance :

GS Paper III – Internal Security

• Counter-terrorism intelligence architecture
• Cybersecurity incidents and digital infrastructure protection
• Financial crime, narcotics, terror financing investigations
• Technology-driven policing

GS Paper II – Polity & Governance

• Federalism in policing (State subject, Central platform)
• Executive powers, absence of statutory backing
• Oversight and accountability mechanisms

WHAT IS NATGRID?

• A real-time, secured data access platform for:
  • Police
  • Intelligence agencies
  • Investigative bodies
• Purpose:
  • To integrate multiple government & private databases
  • Enable fast, intelligence-led investigations
• Conceptualised in 2009 after the 26/11 Mumbai attacks.
• Became fully operational in 2023–24.

WHAT KIND OF DATA DOES NATGRID ACCESS?

NATGRID enables real-time access to:

• Aadhaar data
• Driving licence & vehicle registration
• Airline passenger data
• Banking & financial transactions
• Telecom records
• Social media account metadata

This allows multi-dimensional profiling for:

• Terror cases
• Financial crimes
• Narcotics
• Cybercrime
• Organised crime

WHO CAN ACCESS NATGRID?

Earlier Access (Only Central Agencies):

• Intelligence Bureau
• Research and Analysis Wing
• National Investigation Agency
• Enforcement Directorate
• Financial Intelligence Unit
• Narcotics Control Bureau
• Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Current Expansion:

• SP-rank State Police officers now included

Marks a shift from Central-only intelligence to federal policing integration.

WHY WAS NATGRID CREATED?

• Problem earlier:
  • Agencies had to:
    • Write letters
    • Seek case-specific approvals
    • Wait weeks for data
• Post-26/11 reform logic:
  • Terror attacks exploited information silos
• NATGRID solves this by:
  • Providing single-window, integrated access
  • Eliminating:
    • Inter-agency delays
    • Jurisdictional bottlenecks

OPERATIONAL ADVANTAGES

• No FIR required to access data.
• Enables:
  • “Join-the-dots” investigations
  • Preventive intelligence
  • Financial trail mapping
• Reduces:
  • Inter-agency dependency
  • Tactical delays
• Critical for:
  • Terror financing
  • Cryptocurrency fraud
  • Cross-border crime
  • Cyber extortion

CURRENT OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES

Despite being designed as a real-time system, State police report:

• Slow login processes
• Delayed data retrieval
• Procedural friction
• Officers still dependent on manual follow-ups

Indicates a gap between platform design and field usability.

CYBERSECURITY CONTEXT

• India recorded:
  • 20.41 lakh cyber incidents in 2024
• Government concern:
  • Repeated attempts to breach:
    • Power grids
    • Telecom networks
    • Financial infrastructure
• NATGRID is now positioned as:
  • A core digital internal security backbone

GOVERNANCE & POLITICAL CONTEXT

• Originally conceptualised under P. Chidambaram (2009).
• Gained full momentum after 2019 under Amit Shah as Home Minister.
• Key governance change:
  • Central–State trust deficit was resolved
  • Enabled State police onboarding

CONSTITUTIONAL & PRIVACY IMPLICATIONS

NATGRID directly engages:

• Article 21 – Right to Privacy
• Doctrine from:
  • Puttaswamy judgment (Legality, Necessity, Proportionality)

Key Risks:

• Mass surveillance potential
• Profiling without judicial warrant
• No FIR requirement dilutes judicial oversight
• Data misuse risk in political or civil cases
• Lack of independent audit mechanism

Security efficiency ↑ but privacy safeguards remain institutionally weak.

FEDERALISM DIMENSION

• Policing is a State subject.
• NATGRID:
  • Operates under Union Home Ministry control.
• Expansion to State police:
  • Strengthens cooperative federalism
  • But:
    • Central platform still controls architecture, access logs, and audit

COMPARISON WITH GLOBAL MODELS

Country	Platform	Oversight
USA	Fusion Centers	Strong Congressional + Judicial oversight
UK	GCHQ–NPCC systems	Parliamentary Intelligence Committee
India	NATGRID	Executive-controlled, weak statutory oversight

CORE POLICY DILEMMA

Security Objective	Liberty Risk
Faster crime detection	Mass data aggregation
Preventive intelligence	Surveillance without suspicion
Unified access	Weak data minimisation

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE (REFORM AGENDA) ?

• Enact a dedicated NATGRID statutory law:
  • Defines:
    • Purpose limitation
    • Data retention period
    • Audit standards
• Mandatory:
  • Independent oversight authority
  • Judicial access logs
• Technical reforms:
  • Faster access interfaces
  • Tiered access control
• Parliamentary reporting on:
  • Annual request volumes
  • Misuse cases
  • Breach audits

---

Filaments

---

WHY IN NEWS ?

• On December 3, researchers from the University of Oxford reported:
  • Discovery of a ~50 million light-year-long galaxy filament.
  • The filament shows aligned galaxy spins, suggesting that the entire filament itself is rotating.
• The team claims it may be:
  • “One of the largest spinning structures ever observed in the universe.”
• This provides direct observational support to predictions made by cosmological simulations.

Relevance :

GS Paper III – Science & Technology

• Astrophysics and cosmology
• Dark matter and large-scale structure of the universe
• Observational astronomy and simulation-based science

GS Paper I – Physical Geography (World Geography Interface)

• Large-scale structure of the universe
• Formation of galaxies and cosmic web

WHAT ARE COSMIC / GALAXY FILAMENTS?

• Cosmic filaments are:
  • The largest known structures in the universe.
  • Thread-like formations forming the Cosmic Web.
• They are composed of:
  • Dark matter
  • Intergalactic gas
  • Galaxies
• Typical scale:
  • Tens to hundreds of millions of light-years
• They:
  • Connect massive galaxy clusters
  • Surround vast empty regions called voids

STRUCTURE OF THE COSMIC WEB

The large-scale universe is arranged into:

• Filaments → long, thread-like galaxy highways
• Walls/Sheets → flat, dense galaxy regions
• Nodes (Clusters) → intersections of filaments
• Voids → enormous empty regions

 Together, these form the Cosmic Web, the universe’s fundamental large-scale architecture.

HOW DO COSMIC FILAMENTS FORM?

• Originates from:
  • Tiny density fluctuations just after the Big Bang
• Under the influence of gravity:
  • Matter collapses into sheets
  • Sheets intersect → filaments
  • Filaments intersect → clusters
• Dominant driver:
  • Dark Matter, which provides gravitational scaffolding
• Ordinary matter (gas + galaxies) follows dark matter distribution.

WHY ARE FILAMENTS CALLED “COSMIC HIGHWAYS”?

• Gas and small galaxies:
  • Flow along filaments toward massive galaxy clusters.
• This inflow:
  • Feeds galaxy growth
  • Triggers star formation
  • Shapes galactic evolution over billions of years
• Hence, filaments decide:
  • Where galaxies form
  • How fast they grow
  • How much fresh gas they receive

HOW DO ASTRONOMERS DETECT FILAMENTS?

• By:
  • Mapping positions and distances of thousands of galaxies
  • Using redshift surveys
• Then:
  • Tracing spatial clustering patterns
• Supported by:
  • Large-scale computer simulations based on:
    • Lambda-CDM Model of cosmology
• These simulations reproduce:
  • Filaments, walls, voids, and clusters almost exactly as observed.

WHAT EXACTLY DID THE OXFORD TEAM DISCOVER?

• A ~50 million light-year galaxy filament
• Traced by:
  • At least 14 galaxies
• Unique feature:
  • The galaxies’ axes of rotation are aligned with the filament’s direction
• Interpretation:
  • The entire filament is slowly rotating as a coherent structure

WHY IS ROTATION OF A FILAMENT IMPORTANT?

• Earlier belief:
  • Filaments are static gravitational channels
• New result shows:
  • Filaments can have large-scale angular momentum
• This supports:
  • The theory that gravitational infall and tidal forces can spin up even gigantic cosmic structures
• It links:
  • Galaxy-scale rotation → filament-scale rotation → cosmic-scale dynamics

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

• Confirms that:
  • Angular momentum exists at the largest observable scales
• Strengthens:
  • Theoretical predictions from cosmological simulations
• Helps explain:
  • Why galaxies in the same filament often show spin alignment
• Improves understanding of:
  • Structure formation
  • Galaxy evolution
  • Dark matter dynamics

IMPLICATIONS FOR COSMOLOGY

• Validates:
  • The gravitational instability model of structure formation
• Improves:
  • Precision in large-scale universe mapping
• Supports:
  • The idea that:
    • The universe evolved from tiny early ripples into a connected cosmic network