Primus Civil Services Academy

Login / Register
Facebook Instagram Youtube Telegram X-twitter
  • +91 9364908441
  • reachout@primusias.com
Stay connected via Google News
Follow us for the latest travel updates and guides.
Add as preferred source on Google

September 7th Current Affairs

Home / UPSC / Current affairs / UPSC Current Affairs – September 7th

Table of Contents

Delhi Building Collapse: Questions over Urban Safety and Building Regulation

What happened?

A multi-storey building in Delhi’s Satya Niketan area, near Delhi University’s South Campus, collapsed while being used as a paying-guest/student accommodation. The building was reportedly several decades old and renovation/construction work was underway, including work in the basement. Rescue teams, including the Delhi Fire Service and disaster-response personnel, conducted search and rescue operations.

The reported death toll has risen to six, with several people injured and rescued from the debris. The exact cause is still under investigation; authorities are examining the building’s age, ongoing construction/renovation and structural condition.

Why is this important for UPSC?

  1. Urbanisation and unplanned development

Rapid urbanisation has increased demand for:

  • Affordable housing
  • PG accommodation
  • Rental housing
  • Commercial conversion of residential buildings

In densely populated areas, buildings may be modified without adequate structural assessment.

  1. Building safety and regulatory failure

The incident raises questions regarding:

  • Structural safety audits
  • Building-code compliance
  • Illegal/unauthorised construction
  • Regular inspection of old buildings
  • Accountability of owners and regulatory authorities

The Delhi government has indicated action against those responsible, while civic authorities have also moved against illegal multi-storey constructions.

  1. Disaster Management

Building collapse is a man-made/technological disaster rather than a purely natural disaster.

Key requirements include:

  • Preparedness: structural audits and risk mapping
  • Response: rapid search and rescue
  • Recovery: medical assistance, compensation and rehabilitation
  • Mitigation: enforcement of building codes and safety standards

The incident also highlights the importance of coordination among Delhi Police, Fire Services, Delhi Disaster Management Authority and local bodies.

Relevant institutional framework

National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA)
→ Provides guidelines and policy direction for disaster preparedness and mitigation.

State/District Disaster Management Authorities
→ Coordinate disaster response at the State and local levels.

Municipal authorities
→ Responsible for building permissions, inspections, enforcement of building regulations and action against unauthorised construction.

National Building Code of India (NBC)
→ Provides guidelines for safe building design, construction, fire safety and related standards.

Harnessing BRICS ‘POWER’ to Empower the World

The editorial comes ahead of the 18th BRICS Summit, to be hosted by India in New Delhi on September 12–13, 2026. India assumed the BRICS chairship on January 1, 2026. The central argument is that BRICS can use its growing economic and demographic weight to give greater voice to the Global South.

What is the ‘POWER’ framework?

The article presents POWER as five principles for strengthening BRICS cooperation:

Letter

Meaning

Core idea

P

Principle

Uphold UN Charter, sovereignty and non-interference

O

Openness

Protect multilateral trade and oppose protectionism

W

Win-Win

Inclusive development and economic cooperation

E

Engine

Make BRICS a driver of global economic growth

R

Responsibility

Contribute to global peace, development and fairness

 

  1. P – Principle: Defending a rules-based world order

The editorial argues that BRICS should support the fundamental principles of the UN Charter, particularly:

  • Sovereign equality of states
  • Non-interference in internal affairs
  • Peaceful settlement of disputes
  • Opposition to hegemonism and power politics
  1. O – Openness: Against protectionism

The editorial criticises growing:

  • Tariff barriers
  • Protectionism
  • Economic decoupling
  • Supply-chain disruptions

It advocates an open multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core.

Important concept: WTO

The World Trade Organization promotes a rules-based international trading system.

A key principle mentioned is Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) treatment, under which WTO members generally provide equal trade treatment to other members, subject to permitted exceptions.

  1. W – Win-Win: Development at the centre

BRICS should focus on inclusive development, particularly for developing countries.

The article emphasises:

  • UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Macroeconomic policy coordination
  • Trade and investment facilitation
  • Local-currency transactions
  • Cross-border payment systems
  • Financial safety nets
  • Food and energy security

This is important because developing countries often remain vulnerable to external financial shocks and fluctuations in dominant international currencies.

India’s interest

India can use BRICS to promote:

Global South interests + Financial diversification + Development cooperation

  1. E – Engine: BRICS as a global growth engine

This is one of the most important parts for UPSC.

According to the article, BRICS countries account for approximately:

  • Nearly half of the world’s population
  • Around 30% of global economic output
  • Around one-fifth of global trade

The article also cites projections that BRICS growth could be nearly three times faster than the G7 by 2028.

Areas of future cooperation

BRICS can leverage its combined strengths in:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Digital economy
  • Smart manufacturing
  • New industrialisation
  • Science & technology
  • Agriculture
  • Healthcare
  • Education

China has also established a China-BRICS AI Development and Cooperation Center and a China-BRICS New Quality Productive Forces Research Center.

  1. R – Responsibility: Role in global governance

The editorial argues that BRICS has a responsibility to:

  • Promote peace
  • Support development
  • Strengthen cooperation among developing countries
  • Make global governance more representative
  • Give greater voice to the Global South

This becomes particularly important because India and China are set to hold successive BRICS presidencies, making their coordination significant for the future functioning of the grouping.

Why is this important for India?

  1. Leadership of the Global South

India can use BRICS to articulate concerns of developing countries on:

  • Climate finance
  • Development finance
  • Food and energy security
  • Technology access
  • Reform of international institutions
  1. Multipolarity

BRICS strengthens the movement towards a multipolar international order, rather than one dominated by a few major powers.

  1. Strategic autonomy

India’s participation in BRICS allows it to engage simultaneously with different power centres while retaining independent foreign-policy choices.

  1. Economic opportunities

Greater cooperation can benefit India through:

  • Investment
  • Trade
  • Digital cooperation
  • AI and emerging technologies
  • New payment mechanisms

Supply-chain diversification

India–China dimension

The article also highlights improving India–China economic and people-to-people relations.

It notes that five direct flight routes between India and mainland China have resumed, while border trade has also reopened after a six-year suspension.

UPSC perspective

This does not mean that all India–China differences have disappeared.

Rather, it highlights the importance of issue-based cooperation despite strategic differences.

India therefore needs to balance:

Competition + Cooperation + Strategic Autonomy

Challenges before BRICS

Despite its growing weight, BRICS faces several challenges:

Divergent interests

Members have different political systems, economic priorities and geopolitical interests.

India–China tensions

Border and strategic disagreements can constrain deeper cooperation.

Russia-West tensions

Russia’s geopolitical confrontation with Western countries affects the group’s dynamics.

Economic diversity

BRICS includes economies at very different levels of development.

Institutional limitations

Unlike the EU, BRICS does not have strong supranational institutions or binding integration mechanisms.

Expansion vs cohesion

A larger BRICS increases its global weight but can also make consensus more difficult.

Cost of UCT Schemes: The Political and Fiscal Cost of Unconditional Cash Transfers

What are Unconditional Cash Transfers (UCTs)?

UCTs are direct monetary transfers made to beneficiaries without requiring them to fulfil a specific behavioural condition.

For example, a woman may receive a fixed monthly amount directly into her bank account without having to undertake a specified activity such as sending children to school or visiting a health centre.

Examples

  • Maharashtra – Mukhyamantri Majhi Ladki Bahin Yojana
  • Karnataka – Gruha Lakshmi Yojana
  • Tamil Nadu – Kalaignar Magalir Urimai Thittam
  • West Bengal – Lakshmir Bhandar
  • Odisha – Subhadra Yojana

The expansion of such schemes has been particularly significant for women. Research indicates that about 118 million women across 12 States were receiving UCTs, according to a 2026 study.

Why have UCT schemes become popular?

Women-centred welfare

UCTs provide women with direct control over a portion of household income.

This can improve:

  • Financial independence
  • Savings
  • Consumption
  • Healthcare expenditure
  • Children’s education
  • Women’s bargaining power within households

An EAC-PM study of Maharashtra’s Ladki Bahin and Odisha’s Subhadra schemes found substantial improvements in beneficiaries’ savings and consumption.

Digital infrastructure

The expansion of:

Jan Dhan accounts + Aadhaar + Mobile + DBT

has made it easier for governments to transfer money directly to beneficiaries and reduce intermediaries.

The major concern: Fiscal sustainability

States have limited fiscal resources. Large recurring cash transfers can increase pressure on State finances.

According to the article, States are expected to spend approximately $18 billion on UCTs in 2025–26.

The concern is not simply the amount spent, but the opportunity cost.

Money spent on recurring transfers could otherwise be used for:

  • Capital expenditure
  • Infrastructure
  • Education
  • Healthcare
  • Skill development
  • Employment generation

Therefore:

Welfare expenditure is not inherently bad, but its sustainability and opportunity cost matter.

The problem of targeting

UCT schemes often have eligibility criteria.

This creates two types of errors:

Inclusion error

An ineligible person receives the benefit.

Exclusion error

An eligible person is left out.

This becomes particularly difficult in India’s informal economy, where household income is difficult to measure accurately.

The Tamil Nadu experience, discussed in the current debate, illustrates how exclusions can generate dissatisfaction among people who believe they are eligible.

Political cost of UCTs

The article makes an important argument:

Cash transfers do not necessarily guarantee electoral success.

UCTs are increasingly viewed as an electoral strategy aimed particularly at women voters. However, governments implementing such schemes can still face electoral setbacks.

Why?

Because beneficiaries may consider:

  • Amount insufficient
  • Eligibility criteria unfair
  • Payments irregular
  • Excluded groups dissatisfied
  • Other government performance more important

Thus:

Welfare benefits can influence electoral behaviour, but they cannot substitute for overall governance.

UCTs: Welfare vs "Freebies"

Arguments supporting UCTs

  • Reduce immediate poverty and economic insecurity
  • Recognise women’s unpaid care work
  • Increase women’s financial autonomy
  • Improve household consumption
  • Can improve health and education outcomes
  • Provide social protection to vulnerable households

Research on UCTs has found no evidence that such transfers necessarily discourage women’s paid employment or education.

Criticism

  • Recurring fiscal burden
  • Opportunity cost
  • Possibility of competitive populism
  • Targeting/exclusion problems
  • Limited long-term productive capacity
  • May divert resources from employment-generating investments

Important distinction: UCT vs Conditional Cash Transfer

UCT

Conditional Cash Transfer

No specific behavioural condition

Linked to a specific condition

Direct income support

Incentivises desired behaviour

Example: women’s monthly assistance

Example: cash linked to education/health conditions

Focus on immediate welfare/income

Focus on behavioural and human-capital outcomes

 

What should be the way forward?

  1. Move towards “Cash Plus”

Cash transfers should be complemented by:

Cash + Skill development + Healthcare + Education + Employment opportunities

The EAC-PM has also argued for a cash-plus empowerment framework to maximise developmental outcomes.

  1. Periodic review

Transfer amounts should be periodically reviewed according to:

  • Inflation
  • Household expenditure
  • Fiscal capacity

The EAC-PM specifically recommended periodic review of transfer amounts.

  1. Better targeting

Use improved databases and transparent eligibility criteria while ensuring that digitisation does not create exclusion.

  1. Fiscal responsibility

States should evaluate UCT schemes alongside:

  • Fiscal deficit
  • Debt sustainability
  • Capital expenditure
  • Social-sector spending
  1. Recognise unpaid care work

Women’s unpaid domestic and care work has significant economic and social value. UCTs can be viewed partly as an attempt to recognise this otherwise invisible contribution.

Forest Rights Act: Balancing Tribal Rights with Forest Conservation

Why in News?

The Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 has come into focus over a dispute concerning the role of Gram Sabhas in forest diversion and forest clearances. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs has reportedly maintained that the FRA itself does not contain a provision requiring Gram Sabha consent specifically for forest clearance. This has triggered debate over the relationship between the FRA, forest-clearance procedures and the rights of forest-dwelling communities.

What is the Forest Rights Act, 2006?

The official name is the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.

It seeks to correct the “historical injustice” faced by forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers whose customary rights over forests were not adequately recognised under earlier forest laws.

Who can claim rights?

  1. Forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes
  2. Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs)
    They must satisfy the statutory requirement of having been primarily residing in and dependent on forests or forest land for their bona fide livelihood needs for the specified period before December 13, 2005.

What rights does the FRA recognise?

The Act recognises both individual and community rights.

Individual Forest Rights (IFR)

These include rights to:

  • Occupy and cultivate forest land under specified conditions.
  • Ownership/access to minor forest produce.
  • Conversion of certain forest villages into revenue villages.
  • Rehabilitation in cases where illegal eviction occurred without recognition of rights.

Community Forest Rights (CFR)

Communities can receive rights relating to:

  • Grazing
  • Fishing
  • Access to water bodies
  • Collection and use of minor forest produce
  • Traditional community resources
  • Protection, regeneration, conservation and management of Community Forest Resources

The Act specifically excludes the traditional right of hunting or trapping wild animals.

Why is the Gram Sabha important?

Under the FRA, the Gram Sabha initiates the process of determining forest rights.

The process broadly involves:

Gram Sabha → Sub-Divisional Level Committee → District Level Committee

The Gram Sabha therefore acts as the grassroots institution for identifying and verifying forest-right claims.

Why is this significant?

It represents a shift from a purely forest-department-centric model towards community participation in forest governance.

The current controversy: Does FRA require Gram Sabha consent for forest clearance?

This distinction is crucial.

The FRA itself does not expressly say that Gram Sabha consent is required for every forest clearance.

However, procedures governing diversion of forest land have required that the process relating to recognition and settlement of forest rights under the FRA be completed before forest diversion is cleared.

This has created a practical expectation of Gram Sabha involvement/No Objection Certificates (NOCs) in forest-diversion proposals.

Why does this matter?

It creates a tension between:

Development projects
⬇️
Hydropower, mining, roads, infrastructure

and

Community rights + forest conservation

The debate becomes especially important for large projects affecting tribal and forest-dependent communities.

Proposed “Super-Majority” approach

A committee has considered an NHPC proposal that a 70–75% “qualified super-majority” of affected Gram Sabhas could be sufficient for large hydropower projects considered to be of national importance.

Why is this controversial?

Arguments in favour:

  • Prevents a single Gram Sabha from indefinitely blocking a nationally important project.
  • Facilitates infrastructure development.
  • Provides a collective decision-making mechanism.

Arguments against:

  • Could weaken the voice of smaller or vulnerable communities.
  • Risks reducing community consent to a numerical exercise.
  • May undermine the spirit of decentralised forest governance.

FRA and Forest Conservation: Conflict or Complementarity?

India has two important objectives:

Social justice

Protect the rights and livelihoods of forest-dependent communities.

Environmental conservation

Prevent indiscriminate diversion and degradation of forests.

The challenge is to ensure that recognition of community rights does not become a route to ecological degradation, while conservation policies should not be used to deny legitimate tribal rights.

The government has argued in another recent legal context that the FRA and the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980 should be interpreted harmoniously so that both forest conservation and social justice are advanced.

Why is FRA important for UPSC?

Tribal empowerment

FRA gives forest communities a greater role in decisions affecting their livelihoods and resources.

Decentralisation

It strengthens the role of the Gram Sabha, linking forest governance with grassroots democracy.

Livelihood security

Minor forest produce and community resources are important sources of livelihood for forest-dependent communities.

Environmental governance

Community participation can potentially improve conservation by giving local communities a stake in sustainable forest management.

Major challenges in implementation

  1. High rejection of claims

Many legitimate claims may face difficulties because of inadequate documentary evidence.

  1. Administrative capacity

Gram Sabhas and local committees often lack adequate technical and institutional support.

  1. Conflict with other laws

FRA can intersect with forest conservation, wildlife protection and land-related legislation.

  1. Development–conservation conflict

Mining, dams, roads and other projects can overlap with areas where forest rights are claimed.

  1. Lack of awareness

Many eligible communities remain unaware of the legal rights available to them.

  1. Weak Community Forest Resource recognition

While CFR provisions are potentially transformative, implementation remains uneven across States.

Way Forward

Rights-based conservation

Forest conservation should involve communities rather than treating them merely as occupants or encroachers.

Strengthen Gram Sabhas

Provide them with:

  • Technical assistance
  • Legal support
  • Mapping facilities
  • Access to information

Transparent forest diversion

Before major projects, ensure transparent assessment of:

  • Forest rights
  • Biodiversity
  • Livelihood impacts
  • Rehabilitation requirements

Improve convergence

FRA implementation should be coordinated with forest, tribal welfare, rural development and environmental authorities.

Ensure genuine participation

Community participation should be informed, transparent and meaningful, rather than merely procedural.

Judicial Integrity — A Case the Court Cannot Ignore

The editorial discusses allegations against Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, Acting Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, and the larger question of how India can protect judicial independence while ensuring judicial accountability and integrity. Supreme Court judge Justice Sandeep Mehta reportedly wrote three letters to the Chief Justice of India seeking Justice Sharma’s transfer and raising allegations including victimisation of judges, maladministration, improper case allocation and nepotism. These remain allegations and should not be treated as established facts without due process.

Why is the issue important?

The controversy is significant because the allegations reportedly came from a sitting Supreme Court judge and were communicated directly to the CJI.

The larger concern is not merely about one judge. It raises questions about:

  • Judicial accountability
  • Judicial independence
  • Transparency in the judiciary
  • Case allocation
  • Collegium system
  • Public confidence in the judiciary
  • Mechanisms for dealing with judicial misconduct

The central dilemma is:

How can judges remain independent from political and executive pressure while still being accountable for misconduct?

What is Judicial Integrity?

Judicial integrity means that judges perform their constitutional responsibilities with:

  • Impartiality
  • Independence
  • Honesty
  • Fairness
  • Objectivity
  • Probity
  • Commitment to the Constitution and rule of law

Judicial integrity is essential because courts derive much of their legitimacy from public trust.

If citizens begin to believe that judicial decisions are influenced by favouritism, corruption or personal interests, the credibility of the entire judicial institution can suffer.

The “Master of the Roster” Issue

One important issue highlighted is the master of the roster.

What does it mean?

The Chief Justice of a court has the administrative authority to:

  • Constitute Benches
  • Allocate cases
  • Decide which Bench hears particular categories of cases

This power is based primarily on judicial convention and Supreme Court jurisprudence, rather than a specific constitutional provision.

Why is it important?

Case allocation can potentially influence which Bench hears a particular matter.

Therefore, excessive concentration of this administrative power without adequate transparency can create concerns regarding:

Fairness + Institutional checks + Judicial accountability

At the same time, the power is necessary for the efficient administration of a court.

Judicial Independence ≠ Judicial Immunity

Judicial independence means:

Judges should be protected from:

  • Political pressure
  • Executive interference
  • Personal threats
  • External influence

so that they can decide cases according to the Constitution and law.

But independence cannot mean:

Freedom from all forms of accountability.

A judge should therefore enjoy functional independence, while credible allegations of misconduct should be subjected to a fair institutional process.

Existing Accountability Mechanism

The Constitution provides a very high threshold for removing a Supreme Court or High Court judge.

Supreme Court Judge

Under Article 124(4), a Supreme Court judge can be removed by the President after an address by both Houses of Parliament, supported by:

  • A majority of the total membership of that House; and
  • A majority of not less than two-thirds of members present and voting

The grounds are:

Proved misbehaviour or incapacity.

High Court Judge

The corresponding provision is contained in Article 217, read with the removal procedure under Article 124.

Thus, removal is deliberately difficult because it is intended to protect judicial independence.

The Accountability Gap

The editorial points towards a major institutional problem:

The existing system can be either:

Too weak to ensure timely accountability

or

Too difficult to activate in practice.

The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 provides the statutory framework for investigating allegations that could lead to removal.

However, the parliamentary removal process is extremely difficult to complete.

The editorial therefore argues for a mechanism that is:

Independent + credible + transparent + time-bound

without compromising judicial independence.

The Veeraswami Judgment

  1. Veeraswami v. Union of India (1991)

The Supreme Court held that registration of an FIR against a sitting higher-court judge requires the prior permission of the Chief Justice of India.

Why?

The objective was to prevent frivolous criminal proceedings from being used as a tool to intimidate or harass judges.

The dilemma

Such safeguards protect judicial independence, but if internal accountability mechanisms are weak, they can also create an accountability gap.

This reflects the broader constitutional principle:

Protection from external interference should not become protection from legitimate scrutiny.

Previous Judicial Controversies

The editorial refers to earlier episodes to show that institutional leadership can sometimes provide interim safeguards.

Examples include:

  • Justice V. Ramaswami
  • Justice Soumitra Sen
  • Justice P.D. Dinakaran
  • Justice Yashwant Varma

These cases demonstrate the recurring difficulty of dealing with allegations against higher-court judges through existing mechanisms.

Collegium System and Judicial Integrity

The issue also connects with the Collegium system.

The Collegium plays a major role in:

  • Appointment of judges
  • Transfer of judges
  • Recommendation of Chief Justices

Concerns

Critics have pointed to:

  • Lack of clearly published criteria
  • Limited transparency
  • Limited external accountability
  • Perception of institutional opacity

However

Greater transparency must not allow the executive to gain control over judicial appointments, because that could undermine judicial independence.

Hence, the challenge is to find a balance between:

Independence ↔ Transparency ↔ Accountability

Why Public Trust Matters

Judicial power ultimately depends upon legitimacy.

Unlike the legislature, courts do not derive legitimacy from elections.

Their authority depends heavily on:

  • Constitutional legitimacy
  • Rule of law
  • Institutional credibility
  • Public confidence

Therefore:

Judicial integrity is not merely an ethical requirement for individual judges; it is an institutional necessity for constitutional democracy.

Way Forward

  1. Independent complaints mechanism

Create a credible mechanism for receiving and examining complaints against higher-court judges.

  1. Time-bound preliminary inquiry

Serious and credible complaints should not remain unresolved indefinitely.

  1. Greater transparency

Improve transparency regarding:

  • Case allocation
  • Transfers
  • Collegium decisions
  • Institutional complaints
  1. Checks on administrative powers

The exercise of the master of the roster power should follow objective and transparent principles.

  1. Protect judicial independence

Accountability mechanisms should not become tools for political interference.

  1. Due process

Allegations must be verified before conclusions are drawn. Judges must receive an opportunity to respond.

 

Discover more from Primus Civil Services Academy

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Related Posts

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top

Discover more from Primus Civil Services Academy

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading