Content:

1. Positive Direction
2. Crimes Against Humanity and an Obtuse Indian Stance
3. Should Legislatures in India Have Fixed Tenures?

---

Positive Direction

---

Context :

• First meeting of Special Representatives (SRs) since 2019.
  • Resumed after a pause caused by the military standoff in 2020.
  • Held as per the mandate set by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping during October 2023 talks in Kazan.

Relevance : GS 2(International Relations )

Practice Question : In light of the recent revival of boundary talks between India and China, critically analyze the opportunities and challenges in fostering positive bilateral ties while safeguarding national interests.”(250 words)

Milestone Developments:

• Ajit Doval’s visit to Beijing, the first since 2020, marked a thaw in high-level engagements.
  • Focus on boundary dispute and resolution of Line of Actual Control (LAC) issues, spanning 3,500 km.

Key Agreements and Renewed Initiatives:

• Restart of the Kailash-Mansarovar Yatra and border trade in Sikkim.
  • Data sharing on trans-boundary rivers.

• Potential restoration of ties in suspended sectors:
  • Direct flights.
  • Liberalisation of business and student visas.
  • Journalist exchanges.

Boundary Talks Outcomes

Six Consensuses (China’s Perspective) and Positive Directions (India’s Perspective):

• Continued implementation of the LAC de-escalation process.
  • Reaffirmation of the 2005 Eleven-article agreement to guide boundary resolution.
  • Strengthened Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) at the border.
  • Cross-border exchange enhancements for better bilateral relations.
  • Improved coordination between:
    • Special Representatives (SR) mechanism.
    • Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC).
  • Agreement to hold the next SR meeting in India (2025).

Strategic Importance

Timing:

• Meeting held ahead of 75 years of diplomatic relations in 2025.
  • Aligns with India’s likely participation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit in China.

Momentum in Engagement:

• Reflects renewed willingness to re-establishdialogue and functional mechanisms.
  • Bilateral trade continued despite four years of military tensions, underscoring economic interdependence.

Challenges and Cautions

Security Concerns:

• Military transgressions by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in 2020.
  • Risks of repetition if buffer zones are dismantled without restoring status quo ante.

Transparency Issues:

The need for clear and public communication about:

• Future steps in normalising relations.
  • Progress on de-escalation and de-induction at the border.
  • Mechanisms for preventing future aggression.

Unresolved Issues:

• De-escalation and de-induction are incomplete processes.
  • Restoration of status quo ante (pre-2020 situation) remains a key demand for India.

Way Forward

Comprehensive Resolution:

• Maintain focus on resolving the boundary dispute, guided by the 2005 agreement.
  • Strengthen SR and WMCC frameworks for sustained dialogue.

Trust-building Mechanisms:

• Expand Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) to reduce border tensions.
  • Resume people-to-people connections to build goodwill.

Strategic Vigilance:

• Ensure a robust deterrence strategy at the India-China boundary.
  • Avoid situations leading to unilateral transgressions or escalation.

Diplomatic Engagements:

• Leverage upcoming diplomatic milestones (SCO Summit, 75th anniversary) to ensure substantive progress.
  • Balance economic interdependence with strategic caution.

National Interest Prioritisation:

• Focus on transparency with the domestic audience to build trust in the government’s handling of China relations.
  • Avoid hasty normalization until core security concerns are addressed.

---

 Crimes Against Humanity And An Obtuse Indian Stance

---

Context

• Adoption of Resolution: On December 4, 2024, the UNGA approved a resolution initiating negotiations for a treaty on crimes against humanity (CAH).

• Background: This step follows the International Law Commission’s (ILC) draft CAH treaty submitted to the UNGA in 2019, marking a significant milestone in combating impunity for CAH.

Relevance : GS 2(Social Justice )

Practice Question : Explain the necessities of separate crimes against humanity treaty (CAH ) highlighting its advantages and implementational challenges .( 250 Words )

Understanding Crimes Against Humanity (CAH)

Definition under the Rome Statute:

• Acts such as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, torture, imprisonment, and rape when part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians.

Existing Legal Frameworks:

• Genocide and war crimes have dedicated treaties (Genocide Convention, Geneva Conventions).
  • CAH are governed only under the Rome Statute, creating a legal gap for accountability.

Historical Codification:

• First defined in the 1945London Charter (Nuremberg Tribunal).
  • Subsequently included in the statutes of international tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Why a Dedicated CAH Treaty is Necessary

Limitations of the ICC:

• ICC jurisdiction is restricted to member states, leaving perpetrators in non-member states unaccountable.
  • Focuses only on individual responsibility, omitting state accountability.

State Accountability:

• A CAH treaty would obligate state parties to prevent CAH, akin to the Genocide Convention.
  • States failing to meet these obligations could face jurisdiction under the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Expanded Scope of CAH:

• Potential to include acts such as starvation, gender apartheid, forced pregnancy, terrorism, and crimes against indigenous populations.

India’s Position on the CAH Treaty

Non-Party to the Rome Statute:

India has consistently objected to ICC provisions, including:

• ICC prosecutor’s powers.
  • Role of the UN Security Council in referring cases.
  • Exclusion of nuclear weapons and terrorism as CAH.

Key Concerns with the CAH Treaty:

• Prefers inclusion of crimes only during armed conflicts, not peacetime.
  • Opposes inclusion of “enforced disappearance” as CAH.
  • Advocates for terrorism and use of nuclear weapons as CAH.

Scepticism about Duplication:

• India argues that the CAH treaty may duplicate existing mechanisms under the Rome Statute.
  • Asserts national legislation and courts as better suited to address CAH.

India’s Domestic Challenges

Lack of Domestic Legislation:

• India has no specific laws addressing CAH or genocide.
  • Justice S. Muralidhar (2018): Highlighted the lacuna in India’s criminal law.

Missed Opportunities:

• Recent amendments to India’s criminal law failed to include provisions for CAH.
  • Reflects a lack of focus in domestic policy discourse on addressing international crimes.

Consistency with Position:

• India’s insistence on domestic jurisdiction contrasts with its lack of relevant legal frameworks.

Opportunities for India

Incorporating CAH into Domestic Law:

• Enacting national legislation for CAH would align with India’s position on primacy of domestic jurisdiction.
  • Strengthens accountability mechanisms for grave human rights violations.

International Leadership:

• Adopting progressive policies on CAH would enhance India’s stature as a global leader in human rights advocacy.

Expanding Definitions:

• India could push for inclusion of terrorism and nuclear weapon use in the CAH treaty, reflecting its national security priorities.

Way Forward

Policy Actions:

• Conduct in-depth studies to align CAH definitions with India’s concerns.
  • Advocate for flexibility in treaty negotiations to include India’s priorities.

Domestic Reforms:

• Amend penal laws to include CAH and other international crimes.
  • Build institutional capacity to address violations at national and regional levels.

Strategic Engagement:

• Leverage negotiations to shape treaty provisions reflecting India’s stance.
  • Collaborate with like-minded states to influence definitions and mechanisms.

---

Should Legislatures in India Have Fixed Tenures?

---

Proposal: The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024, aims to align State Assemblies’ terms with the Lok Sabha and hold mid-term elections only for the remainder of the five-year term.

Relevance : GS 2(Polity and Governance )

Practice Question : Evaluate the reasons in favour and against of simultaneous elections .(250 Words )

Governance and Stability:

• Proponents: Stability and focus on development.
  • Critics: Regular elections enhance accountability.

Federalism and Autonomy:

• Proponents: Standardizes election timings.
  • Critics: May undermine State legislatures’ autonomy.

Electoral Expenditure:

• Proponents: Reduces election costs.
  • Critics: Savings may not lead to significant developmental investments.

Political Instability:

• Proponents: Deters destabilization tactics.
  • Critics: Needs complementary reforms to be effective.

Global Models:

• UK: Fixed-term Parliaments Act led to constitutional crises.
  • Germany: Constructive vote of no-confidence impractical in India.

Political Plurality:

• Concerns: Simultaneous elections may favor one party.
  • Evidence: Historical data dismisses this concern.

Addressing Deadlocks:

• Provisions: Mid-term elections for political stalemates.
  • Critics: Reduced tenure may compromise governance.

Broader Implications:

• Erosion of Autonomy: Risks centralizing power.
  • Flexibility vs. Stability: Fixed terms provide stability but need flexibility for political exigencies.