Content

1. Central government notifies key parts of Digital Personal Data Protection Act
2. Gujarat’s Ambaji marble gets GI tag for its quality
3. Iran seizes tanker in Strait of Hormuz, tensions remain high
4. Govt removes 21 quality control orders on textiles, metals, polymers
5. Draft IT Rules Amendments on Synthetically Generated Information (SGI)

---

Central government notifies key parts of Digital Personal Data Protection Act

---

 What is the DPDP Act, 2023?

• First dedicated Indian law regulating digital personal data of citizens.
• Passed in August 2023; large parts notified in November 2025.
• Inspired by global models (GDPR), but with India-specific provisions (state exemptions, no data localisation).
• Enforces core privacy principles: consent, purpose limitation, data minimisation, storage limitation, accountability.

Why was it needed?

• Supreme Court’s Puttaswamy Judgment (2017) declared privacy a fundamental right, requiring a statutory data protection framework.
• India has 815+ million internet users, high data generation, increasing cyber threats.
• Fragmented legal regime earlier (IT Act, SPDI Rules).
• Rising digital public infrastructure (Aadhaar, UPI, ABHA, ONDC) demanded structured protections.

Relevance

• GS2 – Polity & Governance: Fundamental Right to Privacy (Puttaswamy), statutory data protection, government exemptions, RTI implications.
• GS3 – Cybersecurity: Data breaches, digital public infrastructure, cybersecurity frameworks.
• GS2 – Transparency & Accountability: Impact on RTI Act, institutional independence.

Key Concepts

Personal Data

• Any data about an identifiable individual in digital form.
• No special category/sensitive data distinction (unlike GDPR).

Data Principal

• The individual to whom the personal data belongs.

Data Fiduciary

• Entity collecting data (companies, platforms, govt bodies).

Significant Data Fiduciary (SDF)

• Large or high-risk entities; extra compliance:
  • Data Protection Officer (DPO)
  • Independent audits
  • Risk assessments

Consent Manager

• Government-approved intermediaries enabling data principals to:
  • View data use
  • Withdraw consent
  • Request erasure or correction

What was Notified Now?

Major Provisions Enforced from November 2025

• Most operative sections of the DPDP Act.
• DPDP Rules, 2025 operational.
• Amendment weakening RTI Act (removal of “personal information” disclosure requirement) enforced.

Provisions Delayed to November 2026

• Mandatory publishing of Data Protection Officer details.
• Full operationalisation of Consent Manager ecosystem.

Core Obligations of Data Fiduciaries

• Obtain free, informed, specific consent.
• Provide notice detailing purpose of data collection.
• Maintain reasonable security safeguards.
• Allow individuals to:
  • Access their data
  • Correct inaccuracies
  • Seek erasure
  • Nominate representatives
• Report data breaches to the Data Protection Board and users.

Rights of Data Principals (Users)

• Right to Consent and withdrawal.
• Right to Access information on how data is used.
• Right to Correction and Erasure.
• Right to Grievance Redressal.
• Right to Nominate a representative in case of death or incapacity.

Exemptions and Concerns

A. State Exemptions

• Government may process personal data “in the interest of national security, public order, or prevention/detection of offences.”
• Raises concerns of over-broad surveillance.

B. RTI Act Amendment

• Removes requirement to disclose “personal information” of public officials unless public interest outweighs privacy.
• Transparency activists argue:
  • Weakens RTI
  • Reduces accountability
  • Expands privacy shield for bureaucrats and public servants

C. No Data Localisation

• Firms can store data globally except in restricted jurisdictions.
• Criticised by some for national security risks.

Penalties (High-Yield UPSC Points)

• DPDP Board can impose:
  • Up to ₹250 crore per incident for data breaches.
  • Lower penalties for failing to disclose breaches or failing to comply with user rights.
• No criminal penalties.

Institutional Architecture

• Data Protection Board of India (DPB)
  • Handles breaches, complaints.
  • Functions like a civil tribunal.
• Consent Managers
  • Implement data portability-like access.
• Adjudication + Appeals
  • Appeals lie to High Courts.

Comparison with GDPR (Exam-Favourite)

• Similarities
  • Consent-focused.
  • Rights to erasure, correction.
  • Fiduciary accountability.
• Differences
  • India has no sensitive data classification, unlike GDPR.
  • India has state exemptions broader than EU.
  • India’s penalties lower.
  • No dedicated Data Protection Authority like EU.

Benefits

• Strengthens digital trust in India’s data economy.
• Supports startups, DPI, health-tech, fintech.
• Improves cybersecurity resilience.
• Enables user control through consent managers.
• Boosts India’s chances of data adequacy agreements globally.

Concerns & Criticisms

• Broad government exemptions could compromise privacy.
• Weakens RTI, reduces transparency.
• Board’s independence debated (appointed by government).
• No mandatory data localisation (security concerns).
• No explicit protection for non-digital personal data.

Way Forward 

• Narrower “State” exemptions with judicial oversight.
• Strengthening independence of Data Protection Board.
• Privacy-by-design adoption by all major data fiduciaries.
• Periodic audits for high-risk sectors (health, fintech).
• Harmonisation with global privacy norms (GDPR).
• Better grievance redressal filters to avoid backlog.

---

Gujarat’s Ambaji marble gets GI tag for its quality

---

 What Happened?

• Ambaji White Marble from Banaskantha district, Gujarat, has been granted a Geographical Indication (GI) Tag.
• GI tag registered in the name of Ambaji Marbles Quarry and Factory Association.
• Announced during the Tribal Business Conclave in New Delhi.
• Marble originates from Ambaji, a major Shaktipeeth and pilgrimage site.

Relevance

• GS1 – Culture & Heritage: Traditional craftsmanship, historical mining, temple architecture.
• GS3 – Economy: GI tags, rural livelihoods, export competitiveness, ODOP, “Vocal for Local”.

What is a GI Tag?

• A GI tag protects products with unique qualities linked to geographical origin.
• Enforced under Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999.
• Ensures exclusive rights, prevents unauthorised use, boosts rural and artisanal economies.

Why Ambaji Marble? Key Features

• Highly valued pure white stone.
• Known for:
  • High calcium content
  • High strength
  • Superior shine and durability
• Strong historic lineage: mines active for 1,200–1,500 years.
• Used in iconic heritage architecture (e.g., Dilwara Jain temples of Mount Abu).
• Exported/used in temples in U.S., New Zealand, England.

Significance of the GI Tag

Economic

• Protects authentic Ambaji marble from counterfeits.
• Enhances branding, increases export potential.
• Boosts marble industry in Banaskantha.

Cultural

• Reinforces Ambaji’s identity as both spiritual and craft heritage centre.
• Connects temple architecture legacy with contemporary markets.

Administrative

• Recognition by Ministry of Commerce & Industry elevates global positioning.
• Allows formal certification and GI labelling for industry stakeholders.

Link to Tribal Regions and PM’s Visit 

• PM visiting Dediapada (Narmada district) for Birsa Munda birth anniversary celebrations.
• Focus on tribal welfare + infrastructure = ₹9,700 crore projects announced.
• Ambaji marble GI announcement coincides with Janjatiya Gaurav Varsh activities and tribal economic upliftment events.

Broader Implications

• Enhances heritage tourism around Ambaji Shaktipeeth.
• Strengthens global competitiveness of Indian natural stone sector.
• Encourages preservation of traditional mining communities.
• Aligns with ‘Vocal for Local’ and One District One Product (ODOP) frameworks.

---

Iran seizes tanker in Strait of Hormuz, tensions remain high

---

What is the Strait of Hormuz?

• A narrow maritime chokepoint between Iran and Oman.
• Connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea.
• Width: ~39 km at narrowest point; heavily militarised.
• One of the world’s most critical energy corridors.

Relevance

• GS2 – International Relations: Iran–US tensions, JCPOA, West Asian geopolitics, India’s balancing diplomacy.
• GS3 – Economy: Impact on oil prices, India’s energy security, supply chain vulnerabilities.
• GS3 – Security: Maritime security, chokepoints, UNCLOS, Indian Navy’s role.

Why Is It Globally Important?

• Handles one-sixth of global oil trade (≈18–20 million barrels/day).
• Nearly one-third of global LNG exports pass through it (mostly from Qatar).
• Essential for Gulf exporters: Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar.
• Closure can spike oil prices globally → impacts inflation, supply chains, India’s energy security.

Why Is It Constantly in News?

• Regular flashpoint due to Iran–US tensions.
• Iran often threatens to block the Strait in response to sanctions.
• US Fifth Fleet (in Bahrain) maintains security patrols.
• Frequent incidents: tanker seizures, limpet mine attacks, drone strikes.

Details of Current Incident

• Iran seized a Marshall Islands–flagged oil tanker, the Talara.
• Seized in Iranian territorial waters of the Strait of Hormuz.
• A US Navy MQ-4C Triton drone had been circling overhead for hours, tracking the situation.
• Private security analysis: small Iranian boats approached and intercepted the tanker.
• First such seizure in three years.
• Part of a broader pattern of tanker-related coercive actions.

Historical Pattern of Iranian Actions

• Iran seized two Greek tankers (2022).
• Linked to retaliation against Greek compliance with US sanctions.
• Limpet mine attacks on tankers (2019).
• Drone attack on an Israel-linked vessel (2021).
• Tension escalated after US withdrew from the Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA) in 2018.

Strategic Importance for Iran

• Strait gives Iran strategic leverage against Western powers.
• Acts as a pressure tool during sanctions, nuclear negotiations.
• Iran’s coastal geography makes it easy to deploy boats, mines, drones.

Strategic Importance for the US

• Protects freedom of navigation under UNCLOS.
• Ensures energy stability for global markets.
• Uses Fifth Fleet to patrol, deter Iran, safeguard allied shipping.
• Incident reporting often used to build international pressure on Iran.

Implications for India

Energy Security

• India imports ~60% of crude from the Gulf region.
• Any disruption increases freight rates, premium insurance costs, and global crude prices.

Diaspora Security

• Gulf hosts ~9 million Indian workers.
• Regional conflict may trigger evacuation/instability scenarios.

Maritime Strategy

• Strengthens India’s focus on:
  • Sagarmala & Maritime Domain Awareness
  • Indian Ocean Naval deployments
  • Chabahar Port as a counterbalance to Iranian leverage

Diplomacy

• India balances ties with both Iran and US–Arab partners.
• Sensitive to JCPOA developments and sanctions regimes.

Legal Context

• Shipping route lies in international waters, but flanked by territorial waters of Iran and Oman.
• Right of Innocent Passage under UNCLOS.
• Iran imposes restrictive interpretations of passage rights, especially during tensions.

Risk Assessment 

• New seizure marks escalation after relative calm (2022–2025).
• Comes amid:
  • Iran–Israel clashes
  • US sanctions pressure
  • Red Sea instability due to Yemen conflict
• Risk of spillover into broader Gulf confrontation.

If Strait Were Blocked (Hypothetical Analysis)

• Oil prices could jump above $150–$200/barrel.
• LNG shortage hits Asia (Japan, South Korea, India).
• Strategic petroleum reserves become critical.
• Immediate naval mobilisation by US, UK, France.
• Could trigger a limited maritime conflict.

Why the Strait is a “Chokepoint” ?

• Narrow width.
• No alternative shipping route for Gulf exports.
• Heavy concentration of global energy trade.
• High susceptibility to asymmetric warfare (mines, drones, small boats).

---

Govt removes 21 quality control orders on textiles, metals, polymers

---

Why in News?

• The government withdrew 21 Quality Control Orders (QCOs) in the past week.
• Most withdrawals relate to key raw materials: textile intermediates, polymers, metals (aluminium, copper, nickel, tin, lead, zinc).
• Aim: improve raw material availability, reduce production costs, and ease MSME compliance burden.
• Triggered by recommendations of a Government Panel led by NITI Aayog Member Rajiv Gauba.

Relevance

• GS3 – Economy: Manufacturing competitiveness, MSME burden, Ease of Doing Business, non-tariff barriers.
• GS3 – Infrastructure/Industry: Supply-chain flexibility, raw material security, BIS standards.
• GS2 – Governance: Regulatory reforms, role of NITI Aayog.

What is a QCO?

• A Quality Control Order mandates that certain products must conform to BIS standards.
• QCOs make BIS certification compulsory for domestic production and imports.
• Objective: improve product quality, consumer safety, curb low-quality imports.
• Tool for non-tariff regulation under the BIS Act.

Why Were QCOs Introduced in the First Place?

• To raise domestic manufacturing standards.
• Protect consumers from substandard goods.
• Curb dumping of cheap, low-grade imports (especially from China).
• Support “Make in India” and “Atmanirbhar Bharat”.

 Why Withdraw Certain QCOs Now?

• Panel review found mandatory BIS certification on critical raw materials was:
  • Creating supply constraints.
  • Limiting import options.
  • Raising input costs, particularly for MSMEs.
  • Creating dependence on a small number of BIS-certified suppliers.
• Withdrawal expected to restore supply-chain stability.
• Supports manufacturing competitiveness and export flexibility.

Specific Items for Which QCOs Were Removed

Chemicals & Petrochemicals (Textile + Plastic Sector)

• PTA (Purified Terephthalic Acid)
• MEG (Mono Ethylene Glycol)
• Polyester fibre
• Polyester yarn
• Polypropylene
• Polyethylene
• PVC resin
• ABS (Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene)
• Polycarbonate

Metals (Ministry of Mines)

• Aluminium
• Lead
• Nickel
• Tin ingot
• Copper & refined copper
• Zinc

Why These Items Matter?

• Textile sector depends on PTA, MEG, polyester inputs — any disruption raises costs for spinners, weavers, processors.
• Plastics & polymers are foundational raw materials for packaging, consumer goods, automotive parts.
• Metals like aluminium, copper, nickel are crucial for engineering goods, electricals, infrastructure, electronics.

Benefits of Withdrawal

A. For MSMEs

• Lower compliance burden.
• Access to cheaper global inputs.
• Reduced reliance on few domestic BIS-certified suppliers.
• Improved cash flow due to lower raw material costs.

B. For Exporters

• Greater flexibility to use globally certified materials instead of BIS-only inputs.
• Enhanced competitiveness in global markets.

C. For Supply Chains

• Stabilises input supply.
• Avoids production disruptions in critical sectors.
• Mitigates risk of price spikes due to certification bottlenecks.

D. For Textiles Sector (Industry Reaction)

• SIMA says relaxations ensure uninterrupted imports of polyester inputs.
• Helps stabilise domestic yarn and fabric prices.
• Lowers cost pressure on spinners, weavers, processors.
• Encourages competitive pricing for exports.

Government’s Defence of QCO Policy

• DPIIT notes QCOs have significantly improved quality of Indian products.
• 188 QCOs issued so far, covering 773 products.
• Effective in sectors like:
  • Screws, hinges
  • Electrical appliances
  • Water bottles
  • Hardware
• Where industry faced genuine constraints, government offered:
  • Extensions of implementation timelines
  • Exemptions for certain raw materials
  • Periodic reviews

Why This Move Matters Economically ?

• India’s manufacturing cost structure depends heavily on imported raw materials.
• Mandatory BIS certification on raw materials undermines:
  • Ease of Doing Business
  • Manufacturing competitiveness
  • Export growth
• Withdrawal aligns with broader strategy to:
  • Reduce non-tariff barriers
  • Improve logistics and input-market efficiency
  • Support MSME-led economic growth

---

Draft IT Rules Amendments on Synthetically Generated Information (SGI)

---

Basics

• Draft SGI Rules introduce obligations on proactive labelling, filtering, and identification of synthetically generated content.
• Aim: tackle deepfakes, mis/disinformation, and AI-generated content risks.
• Legal basis invoked: IT Act, 2000 and IT Rules, 2021.
• Key concern: whether the government can impose obligations beyond what the parent Act authorises.

Relevance

• GS2 – Polity/Fundamental Rights: Free speech, privacy, legality of delegated legislation, proportionality tests.
• GS3 – Cybersecurity/Tech: Deepfakes, misinformation regulation, AI governance.
• GS2 – Governance: Safe harbour doctrine, intermediary liability, policy overreach.

Key Provisions in the Draft SGI Rules

• Mandatory proactive labelling (“SGI”) for AI-generated content.
• Platforms/intermediaries must filter, detect, and flag synthetic content.
• Obtain user declarations about whether uploaded content is AI-generated.
• Severe penalties for failure to verify, label, or act upon synthetic content.
• Extends obligations to “significant intermediaries” and potentially to AI model providers.

Concerns on Legality and Constitutional Validity

Ultra vires the IT Act:

• IT Act’s Section 79 gives conditional safe harbour but explicitly prohibits imposing a “monitoring obligation.”
• Draft SGI Rules require exactly that: active monitoring, detection, and verification.
  This exceeds the Act’s mandate and may fail the legality test.

Ambiguity in “Intermediary” definition:

• Act defines intermediaries as entities that store/host/transmit content on behalf of others.
• Generative AI platforms (ChatGPT, Perplexity, DeepSeek) are content originators.
• Therefore, they do not fit the definition and imposing intermediary obligations may be legally untenable.

Rule-making overreach:

• Government cannot expand the scope of the IT Act through subordinate legislation.
• Courts consistently invalidate rules that go beyond delegated powers (precedents: Shreya Singhal, Puttaswamy proportionality tests).

Operational and Technical Criticisms

High risk of over-blocking:

• Platforms may label uncertain content as SGI by default, leading to mass censorship.
• Genuine media (e.g., political videos) could be incorrectly blocked, especially during elections.

False positives and false negatives:

• AI detection tools have high error rates.
• Even slightly edited genuine images may be wrongly labelled or blocked.

Surveillance risks:

• Draft rules incentivise platforms to hash user images, scan content, and compare fingerprints with known datasets.
• Such scanning infringes user privacy and contradicts Section 79(2)(b) spirit (no proactive monitoring).

Impact on Freedom of Expression

• Chilling effect:
  Users may self-censor due to fear of wrongful labelling or take-downs.
• Risks to political speech:
  Election-time deepfake concerns must be managed, but overbroad rules risk suppressing opposition or dissent.
• Violation of proportionality:
  Restrictions must be necessary and narrow; blanket proactive monitoring fails this test.

Industry and Civil Society Responses

• SFLC.in:
  Rules unclear on whether generative AI models are intermediaries; makes compliance impossible.
• IAMAI:
  Burdensome obligations threaten safe-harbour provisions.
• Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF):
  Rules incentivise mass surveillance, content scanning, and jeopardise privacy rights.
• Platforms’ likely response:
  Over-blocking, delayed uploads, refusal to process content flagged as potentially synthetic.

Broader Governance Context

• India lacks a specialised AI regulation statute; SGI rules attempt to fill this vacuum.
• DPDP Act, 2023 and Rules, 2025 already impose data governance duties; SGI rules add separate burdens.
• Global trend: US, EU, and UK focus on transparency and accountability but avoid mandatory proactive monitoring (due to privacy risks).

Comprehensive Critical Assessment

Draft SGI Rules conflict with:

• Statutory limits: exceed rule-making powers under IT Act.
  • Constitutional safeguards: violate privacy (Puttaswamy) and free speech (Article 19(1)(a)).
  • Technical realism: place impractical burdens on platforms.
  • Democratic safeguards: risk political censorship and election interference.

Needed reforms:

• Clear definitions of intermediaries vs AI model providers.
• Transparency requirements rather than proactive scanning.
• Narrowly tailored obligations tied to specific harms (election deepfakes, child safety).
• Independent regulator for AI governance instead of expanding IT Act powers.