1. Countering Infiltration in Jammu & Kashmir – Challenges and the Road Ahead – Defence & Security
Why in News?
- The terror attack in Baisaran (Pahalgam) that killed 26 tourists has reignited concerns over infiltration threats along the India-Pakistan border in Jammu & Kashmir.
- Highlights urgent need for:
- Stronger counter-infiltration frameworks,
- Technological upgrades, and
- Infrastructure strengthening along the border.
Key Takeaways
| Theme | Insights |
|---|---|
| Terrain Challenges | – Dense forests (visibility <100m), rugged mountains (Pir Panjal Range). – Difficult physical access (e.g., Baisaran accessible only by foot/pony). |
| Infiltration Trends | – Post-2003 Ceasefire: Marked decline in infiltration. – Success Rate: Dropped to 21% by 2010. – Current Estimates: 50-100 infiltrations annually. |
| Counter-Infiltration Measures | – Border Fencing: Effective but suffers regular winter damage. – Comprehensive Integrated Border Management System (CIBMS): Introduced post-2016 Pathankot attack; uses thermal imagers, radars, sensors. – Implementation faces delays and funding issues. |
| Winter-Specific Problems | – Snowfall damages one-third of the fencing annually. – Extreme cold affects troop mobility, alertness, and surveillance equipment. |
Existing Measures
| Measure | Details |
|---|---|
| Border Fencing (LoC Fence) | – Electrified, barbed-wire fencing. – Reduces infiltration but vulnerable to weather damage. |
| CIBMS (Smart Border Tech) | – Surveillance through radars, infrared sensors, laser barriers. – Provides real-time monitoring. – Pilots successful in Jammu sector; expansion pending. |
| Surveillance Drones | – Usage limited by weather conditions and technical constraints in high-altitude zones. |
| Patrolling and Foot Surveillance | – Heavily relies on human intelligence (HUMINT) and local sources. – Forces: Army, BSF, CRPF. |
Challenges Ahead
| Challenge | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Geography and Weather | Difficult mountainous terrain + winter snowfall = fence gaps, patrol fatigue. |
| Technology Gaps | Incomplete CIBMS rollout; reliance still on manual surveillance. |
| Terrorist Innovation | Use of forest cover, GPS technology, and local guides by terrorists. |
| Funding and Maintenance | Border infrastructure needs sustained investment, faster maintenance cycles. |
| Civilian Areas Near LoC | Proximity to border villages creates human shields and complicates operations. |
Way Forward
| Step | Details |
|---|---|
| Strengthen CIBMS Deployment | Complete full coverage with advanced AI-backed surveillance. |
| All-Weather Border Fencing | Use composite fencing resilient to snowfall and weather. |
| Improve Troop Infrastructure | Heated shelters, enhanced winter clothing, drones with snow-resistance tech. |
| Intelligence Sharing and Coordination | Strengthen IB-RAW-Army local coordination. Expand Village Defence Committees (VDCs). |
| Counter-Radicalisation Programs | Community engagement to reduce local support for infiltrators. |
| Diplomatic Pressure on Pakistan | Internationalize cross-border terror issues at forums like FATF, UN. |
Quick Facts
| Fact | Data |
|---|---|
| Length of India-Pakistan border | 3,323 km |
| Length in J&K and Ladakh | ~1,000 km |
| CIBMS Pilot Project | 5 km stretch in Jammu Sector, 2018 |
| Major Infiltration Routes | Pir Panjal range, Gurez Valley, Machil Sector |
Summary
Despite advanced surveillance systems like CIBMS and electrified fencing, infiltration across the LoC in J&K persists due to terrain challenges, weather vulnerabilities, and Pakistan-backed asymmetric tactics. The recent Pahalgam terror attack underscores the urgency of strengthening border infrastructure, intelligence coordination, and community engagement. India must adopt a multi-domain strategy—technological, military, civil, and diplomatic—to ensure long-term deterrence and border security.
Exam Connect – Possible Questions
Prelims
1. The Comprehensive Integrated Border Management System (CIBMS) primarily aims to:
A. Regulate border trade between SAARC nations
B. Provide real-time surveillance and monitoring of border infiltration
C. Distribute rations to soldiers stationed along the border
D. Demarcate boundaries through satellite imaging
Answer: B
2. Which of the following regions are known infiltration hotspots along the LoC?
- Gurez Valley
- Pir Panjal Range
- Nathula Pass
- Machil Sector
A. 1, 2, and 4 only
B. 1 and 3 only
C. 2 and 3 only
D. All of the above
Answer: A
Nathula is along the India–China border, not India–Pakistan.
Mains :
1. Despite technological advancements, infiltration remains a persistent security threat along the India-Pakistan border in Jammu and Kashmir. Discuss the challenges in countering infiltration and suggest a comprehensive strategy for India.
(GS Paper 3 – Internal Security)
2. 🇮🇳🇵🇰 Pakistan Suspends 1972 Simla Agreement: Strategic Implications for Indo-Pak Relations – InternationaI Relations
Why in News?
- Pakistan announced the suspension of the 1972 Simla Agreement after India’s stringent responses to the terror attack in Pahalgam.
- Marks a significant escalation in bilateral tensions, potentially destabilizing peace mechanisms.
Key Takeaways
| Aspect | Summary |
|---|---|
| Nature of Development | Pakistan’s suspension of a foundational bilateral accord. |
| Immediate Implications | Risk of increased hostilities along the Line of Control (LoC); weakened diplomatic framework. |
| Pakistan’s Motive | Attempt to internationalize the Kashmir dispute; reclaim lost diplomatic leverage. |
| India’s Response | Stresses bilateralism (Simla spirit), opposes third-party mediation. |
Understanding the Simla Agreement (1972)
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Context | Post-1971 Indo-Pak war and Bangladesh Liberation. |
| Date Signed | July 2, 1972 (between Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto). |
| Key Objectives | – Promote peaceful coexistence. – Respect sovereignty and territorial integrity. – Avoid conflict and resolve disputes bilaterally. |
| Major Provisions | – Conversion of ceasefire line into the Line of Control (LoC). – India returned captured territory (over 90,000 Pakistani POWs handed back). – Pakistan agreed to recognize Bangladesh. – Commitment to the UN Charter principles. |
Simla Agreement institutionalized bilateralism, barring international mediation.
Reasons Behind the Suspension
| Reason | Details |
|---|---|
| Retaliation to Indian Actions | Post-Article 370 abrogation and India’s assertive regional policies. |
| Diplomatic Strategy | Move away from bilateralism to seek third-party mediation (e.g., UN, OIC). |
| Domestic Politics | Pressure to show assertiveness amid economic instability and rising internal dissent. |
Strategic Implications
| Issue | Impact |
|---|---|
| LoC Stability | Higher risk of skirmishes and ceasefire violations. |
| Diplomatic Relations | Shrinking space for peaceful negotiations; increased confrontation. |
| Internationalization Attempt | Pakistan might push Kashmir issue to UN forums, OIC, and international courts. |
| India’s Diplomacy | Strengthen its case for bilateral dispute settlement, reject third-party involvement. |
| Regional Stability | Instability could impact South Asian security, hamper economic cooperation (e.g., SAARC). |
🇮🇳 India’s Stance
- Firmly Upholds Bilateralism: Kashmir is a bilateral issue under the Simla Agreement and Lahore Declaration (1999).
- Rejects Third-Party Mediation: Whether by UN, US, or any other actor.
- Diplomatic Strategy: Combine internal security measures with global outreach to expose Pakistan’s support for terrorism.
Quick Facts
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Line of Control (LoC) | Dividing line between Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir (post-1971 war, formalized in Simla). |
| Simla Spirit | The principle of bilateral resolution of disputes between India and Pakistan. |
| Lahore Declaration (1999) | Reaffirmed Simla principles; agreed to confidence-building measures (CBMs). |
Summary
The Simla Agreement of 1972 was the cornerstone of India-Pakistan peace diplomacy, institutionalizing the principle of bilateralism and affirming the sanctity of the Line of Control (LoC). Pakistan’s unilateral suspension of the agreement amid rising tensions reflects a strategic shift toward internationalizing the Kashmir issue, risking diplomatic breakdown and regional instability. India must respond with measured firmness, reinforcing its commitment to bilateral resolution, while leveraging global platforms to isolate state sponsors of terrorism.
Exam Connect – Possible Questions
Prelims
1. The 1972 Simla Agreement between India and Pakistan primarily emphasized:
A. UN mediation in Kashmir
B. Bilateral resolution of disputes
C. Formation of SAARC
D. Indus Waters cooperation
Answer: B
2. Which of the following was a direct outcome of the Simla Agreement?
- Creation of the Line of Control (LoC)
- India’s recognition of Bangladesh
- Return of Pakistani prisoners of war
- Demilitarization of Kashmir
A. 1, 2, and 3 only
B. 1 and 4 only
C. 2 and 4 only
D. All of the above
Answer: A
Statement 4 is incorrect. Kashmir remained heavily militarized post-1972.
Mains :
1. Examine the significance of the Simla Agreement (1972) in India-Pakistan relations. In the light of Pakistan’s recent suspension of the agreement, critically analyse its implications on regional stability.
Final Insight
The suspension of the Simla Agreement marks a critical rupture in the diplomatic scaffolding built over decades. Moving forward, India must combine firm security measures with proactive diplomacy to prevent the regional fallout and maintain strategic stability in South Asia.
3. Section 19 of the POCSO Act, 2012 – Polity
Why in News?
- The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a petition challenging the mandatory reporting requirements under Section 19 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
- Concern: It may criminalize consensual sexual activity among adolescents, especially affecting adolescent girls’ access to healthcare.
Key Takeaways
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| POCSO Act Enacted | November 14, 2012 (Children’s Day). |
| Purpose | Protect children (<18 years) from sexual abuse, exploitation, harassment, and pornography. |
| 2019 Amendment | Introduced stricter penalties, including death penalty for aggravated sexual assaults. |
Section 19 of the POCSO Act: Mandatory Reporting
- Mandate: Every person (including doctors, teachers, parents) must report any knowledge or suspicion of a sexual offence against a child to the police.
- Failure to Report: Punishable with imprisonment up to 6 months and/or fine.
- Key Concern:
- Criminalizes consensual sexual activity between adolescents.
- Discourages teenagers from accessing sexual and reproductive healthcare (pregnancy, STIs).
- Potentially violates right to health and bodily autonomy.
Major Offences under POCSO
| Section | Offence |
|---|---|
| Section 3 | Penetrative Sexual Assault |
| Section 5 | Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault |
| Section 7 | Sexual Assault |
| Section 11 | Sexual Harassment |
| Section 13 | Use of Child for Pornographic Purposes |
| Sections 16-18 | Abetment and Attempt of offences |
Institutional Features
- Special Courts: For speedy trial and child-friendly procedures.
- Identity Protection: Child’s identity must not be disclosed.
- Time-bound Trials: To be completed within one year of filing the case.
- Rehabilitation: Psychological and social rehabilitation support for child victims.
Current Judicial Concerns
- Adolescent Relationships: Blanket criminalization under POCSO disregards mutual consent among teenagers.
- Healthcare Fear: Fear of prosecution discourages adolescents from seeking medical aid.
- Balancing Act Needed: Protection from exploitation vs respecting adolescent rights.
Next Hearing: May 8, 2025 in Supreme Court.
Summary
Section 19 of the POCSO Act, while ensuring swift reporting of child sexual abuse, has unintended consequences — especially on adolescent autonomy and access to healthcare. The blanket criminalization of all sexual activity involving those under 18 fails to distinguish consensual relationships from exploitation. The challenge before the Supreme Court may trigger essential legal reforms, balancing child protection goals with constitutional rights to health, privacy, and bodily integrity.
Exam Connect – Possible Questions
Prelims
1. Which of the following are envisaged by the Right against Exploitation in the Constitution of India?
1. Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour
2. Abolition of untouchability
3. Protection of the interests of minorities
4. Prohibition of employment of children in factories and mines
Correct Answer: (c) 1 and 4 only
Explanation:
- Article 23: Prohibits trafficking in human beings and forced labour.
- Article 24: Prohibits employment of children in hazardous occupations.
- Abolition of Untouchability (Article 17) and Protection of Minorities (Articles 29-30) are separate fundamental rights.
Mains :
1. Examine the challenges posed by mandatory reporting under the POCSO Act in balancing the protection of children and the rights of adolescents.
Final Insight
While the POCSO Act has been a landmark in protecting children’s rights, Section 19’s blanket mandatory reporting requires careful re-examination to avoid criminalizing adolescent behaviour, ensure confidential healthcare access, and uphold fundamental rights without compromising child protection goals.
4. Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023: A Redundant Provision? – Polity
Why in News?
- The inclusion of Section 69 in the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 — which criminalizes sexual intercourse through deceit, particularly under false promises of marriage — has reignited debates.
- Critics argue it duplicates existing rape laws and risks diluting the gravity of sexual offences.
Key Takeaways
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Section 69 | Criminalizes sexual intercourse obtained through deception (e.g., false promises of marriage, job, promotion). |
| Punishment | Imprisonment up to 10 years, lower than maximum penalties for rape (life imprisonment under Section 63, BNS). |
| Overlap | Duplicates the concept of consent under misconception of fact already covered under Section 28 (Definition of Consent) and Section 63 (Rape). |
| Judicial Interpretation | Courts have already narrowed rape definitions in deception cases, distinguishing genuine failed relationships from fraudulent ones. |
Legal Background
- Section 28, BNS: Consent given under a misconception of fact (e.g., false promise of marriage) is not valid consent.
- Section 63, BNS: Defines rape, including intercourse without valid consent.
- Existing Case Law:
- Anurag Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh (2019): Sexual intercourse under a false promise of marriage was held as rape.
- Rajnish Singh @ Sonu v. State of U.P.: Distinction drawn between broken relationships and intentional deception.
Thus, false promise of marriage = Rape under current law, provided fraud at inception is proven.
Issues with Section 69
| Issue | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Redundancy | Existing definitions under rape laws already criminalize sexual acts under fraudulent consent. |
| Dilution of Gravity | Section 69 treats deceitful intercourse as a lesser crime, undermining the seriousness of sexual assault under rape laws. |
| No Non-obstante Clause | Section 69 does not override other provisions, creating confusion about applicable charges. |
| Article 14 Violation | Could lead to unequal treatment of similar crimes, violating the Right to Equality. |
| Policing and Implementation Problems | May encourage overcharging or undercharging based on subjective police interpretations. |
Broader Context: Consent, Deception, and Constitutional Values
- Consent must be free and informed.
- Misleading someone about material facts (like marriage, job) vitiates consent.
- A robust legal system must differentiate between failed promises (normal in human relationships) and fraudulent promises (criminal).
Supreme Court Observations
“When the promise is false from the inception and intended to deceive, it vitiates consent.”
— Anurag Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh (2019)
Summary
Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023) attempts to penalize sexual acts obtained through deception, but its overlap with existing rape provisions (Section 63) and lack of legal clarity raise questions of redundancy, dilution of offence severity, and constitutional inconsistency (Article 14). Existing jurisprudence already holds that fraudulent consent vitiates valid consent, making Section 69 legally unnecessary. Future reforms should aim at streamlining sexual offence laws, enhancing judicial training, and preserving the integrity of consent-based offences.
Exam Connect – Possible Questions
Prelims
1. Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 criminalizes which of the following?
A. False police reporting
B. Sexual intercourse through deception
C. Dowry harassment
D. Voyeurism
Answer: B
2. Under Indian law, consent obtained under a misconception of fact is:
A. Valid, if mutual affection is proven
B. Invalid, and may constitute rape
C. Conditionally valid under Section 69
D. Always treated as breach of contract
Answer: B
Mains :
1.. Critically analyze the introduction of Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Do you agree that it creates redundancy in the legal framework on sexual offences? Justify with reference to constitutional principles.
Final Insight
- Section 69 appears more symbolic than substantive.
- Rather than improving justice delivery, it risks fragmenting the law, complicating prosecution strategies, and undermining the seriousness of crimes like rape.
- Future reforms should focus on streamlining existing provisions, enhancing judicial training, and ensuring consistent application of laws protecting sexual autonomy.
5. Power and Freedom: The Senthilbalaji Case – A Judicial and Ethical Examination – Polity
Why in News?
- On April 23, 2025, the Supreme Court of India addressed the sensitive issue of Tamil Nadu Minister V. Senthilbalaji, who has been out on bail in a money laundering case since September 2024.
- The Court indicated that he must choose between continuing in ministerial office or retaining his freedom, raising crucial concerns about the intersection of power, ethics, and justice.
Key Takeaways
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Conflict of Interest | Holding ministerial power while under serious criminal investigation poses ethical and governance issues. |
| Potential Witness Tampering | The Court feared that his office could influence witnesses and obstruct a fair trial. |
| Premature Re-Induction | Senthilbalaji’s return to the Cabinet post-bail was deemed problematic, given unresolved bail conditions. |
| Impact on Governance | The Court emphasized how such cases erode public trust and administrative integrity. |
Legal Background and Issues
1. Conflict of Interest
- Public office demands highest ethical standards.
- Holding power while under trial creates a real and perceived conflict, undermining public confidence.
2. Witness Protection
- Supreme Court pointed to the risk that an influential minister could intimidate or manipulate witnesses.
- Justice Abhay S. Oka specifically noted risks to the fairness of the investigation and trial.
3. Premature Return to Cabinet
- Bail granted was not an acquittal.
- Bail was granted due to time already served, not because he was cleared of allegations.
- Re-induction into the Cabinet without a final verdict risks institutional credibility.
Wider Implications
| Aspect | Concern |
|---|---|
| Governance | Appointment of tainted individuals to ministerial posts lowers trust in democratic institutions. |
| Judicial Intervention | Court stepping in to question executive appointments shows evolving judicial activism. |
| Public Morality | Raises questions about political standards in India – voters expect clean governance. |
Broader Constitutional Context
- Article 164(1): Ministers hold office during the pleasure of the Governor, but advice comes from the Chief Minister.
- Supreme Court Guidelines (2014)(Public Interest Foundation case):
- Recommended political parties to avoid fielding candidates facing serious criminal charges.
- Emphasized moral responsibility, although no legal bar exists yet on ministers with pending criminal cases.
Summary
The Senthilbalaji case illustrates the dangerous disjuncture between legal permissibility (grant of bail) and ethical expectations (ministerial accountability). While the Constitution does not bar indicted individuals from holding office unless convicted, the Supreme Court has stressed moral responsibility and public expectations of clean governance. Judicial concern over witness influence and conflict of interest also reflect the evolving activist role of the judiciary in ensuring institutional credibility. The episode highlights the urgent need for legal reforms, including fast-tracking trials of public representatives, and ethical codes for ministerial appointments.
Exam Connect – Possible Questions
Prelims
1. Article 164(1) of the Constitution of India relates to:
A. Conditions for disqualification from Lok Sabha
B. Appointment of Governors
C. Tenure of Ministers in a State
D. Powers of the Election Commission
Answer: C
2. In the Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India (2014), the Supreme Court:
A. Barred all undertrial candidates from contesting elections
B. Recommended political parties avoid candidates with serious criminal charges
C. Legalized plea bargaining for elected representatives
D. Abolished discretionary powers of Governors
Answer: B
Mains :
1. Critically evaluate the ethical and constitutional issues raised when public office bearers under serious criminal investigation continue to hold executive posts. Suggest reforms to uphold the integrity of governance.
Final Insight
- The Senthilbalaji case exposes a critical flaw where legal rights (bail) clash with ethical duties (public office).
- In a healthy democracy, individuals must voluntarily step down until their names are legally cleared.
- Institutional reforms, like fast-tracking trials for public representatives, can bridge this gap between legal permissibility and ethical governance.
6. SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES) and India’s Suspension for Pakistan – InternationaI Relations
Why in News?
- Following the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India has suspended the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES) for Pakistani nationals.
- This move reflects deepening regional tensions and India’s growing security concerns related to cross-border terrorism.
Key Takeaways
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Purpose of SVES | Promote regional cooperation and ease of movement among SAARC nations. |
| Recent Action | India suspended the scheme for Pakistan to strengthen internal security. |
| Implication | Highlights rising doubts about the future viability of SAARC itself. |
About SAARC
- South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) was established in 1985.
- Members: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.
- Objective: Promote economic and regional integration among South Asian nations.
About the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES)
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Launch | Initiated in 1992 during the 4th SAARC Summit. |
| Aim | Facilitate visa-free travel for specific categories of people to enhance regional cooperation. |
| Eligible Categories | 24 categories including dignitaries, judges, parliamentarians, senior officials, businessmen, journalists, sportspersons, etc. |
| Mechanism | Special visa stickers valid for one year are issued to eligible individuals, allowing multiple entries without separate visas. |
🇮🇳 India’s Specific Provisions under SVES
- Nepali and Bhutanese citizens: No visa required to enter India.
- Pakistani nationals:
- Originally received one-year multiple-entry business visas.
- Revised in 2015: Only special-category businessmen eligible for three-year visas.
- Sri Lankan nationals: Eligible for e-Tourist visas.
Recent Concerns and Implications
| Aspect | Detail |
|---|---|
| Cross-Border Terrorism | Pakistan’s support for terror groups raises doubts about maintaining open regional travel. |
| Internal Affairs Interference | Pakistan’s actions threaten the principle of non-interference, undermining SAARC unity. |
| Eroding Relevance of SAARC | Regional initiatives like BIMSTEC and the IORA gain more traction, diminishing SAARC’s importance. |
| Security First Approach | India’s action shows a prioritization of national security over regional idealism. |
Summary
India’s suspension of the SVES for Pakistani nationals following the Pahalgam terror attack reflects a security-first shift in regional diplomacy. While SVES aimed to promote South Asian integration, persistent cross-border terrorism has made open travel untenable. The move symbolizes India’s declining faith in SAARC and growing reliance on alternative groupings like BIMSTEC and IORA to pursue development and connectivity without security compromises.
Prelims
1. Which of the following statements about the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES) is correct?
A. It allows unrestricted visa-free travel to all citizens of SAARC nations.
B. It provides visa exemption only to businessmen and sportspersons.
C. It allows multiple-entry visas to selected individuals across 24 categories.
D. It was introduced in the 1985 Dhaka Summit.
Answer: C
2. Which of the following regional groupings excludes Pakistan?
- SAARC
- BIMSTEC
- IORA
A. 1 and 2 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. All of the above
Answer: B
Mains :
1.Critically analyze the implications of India’s suspension of the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES) for Pakistani nationals on regional cooperation and security dynamics in South Asia.
Final Insight
- The suspension of SVES for Pakistani nationals is not just a visa issue — it symbolizes India’s hardening stance against terrorism and shrinking faith in SAARC as an effective regional platform.
- Going forward, India’s focus may shift further toward alternative regional groupings that exclude Pakistan, emphasizing a security-centric foreign policy in South Asia.
7. New Global Pandemic Treaty
Why in News?
- After three years of negotiations, WHO member states (excluding the United States) have agreed on a draft for a legally binding treaty aimed at strengthening global preparedness for future pandemics.
- It is expected to be ratified at the World Health Assembly (May 2025).
- This will be the second legally binding WHO treaty after the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2003).
Key Takeaways
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Main Aim | Enhance global health emergency preparedness and response mechanisms. |
| Focus Areas | Address inequalities, ensure equitable access to vaccines and medical supplies. |
| Global Cooperation | Set up a system for sharing pathogens and benefits, strengthen health systems. |
| Challenges | Limited WHO enforcement powers, absence of the U.S., concerns from pharmaceutical industries. |
Why a Global Pandemic Treaty Was Needed
- COVID-19 pandemic exposed glaring global inequalities — for example:
- Vaccine nationalism: Rich nations hoarded vaccines.
- Medical supply gaps in lower-income countries.
- Need for a coordinated and equitable international health response framework.
Core Provisions of the Treaty
| Provision | Detail |
|---|---|
| Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing | Pharmaceutical companies get access to pathogen data in exchange for ensuring fair distribution of resulting vaccines and treatments. |
| Mandatory Production Allocation | Companies must reserve 10% of products free of charge and 10% at affordable rates for WHO distribution during pandemics. |
| Public Interest Safeguard | Governments can intervene if publicly funded medicines are overpriced or inaccessible. |
| WHO’s Authority | WHO will coordinate responses but cannot override national laws — compliance is voluntary. |
Challenges and Criticisms
| Challenge | Detail |
|---|---|
| Absence of U.S. | Weakens the treaty’s global credibility and reach. |
| Pharmaceutical Industry Concerns | Ambiguities over intellectual property rights and profit-sharing could deter private sector investment. |
| Enforcement Limitations | WHO lacks mechanisms to enforce compliance during future pandemics. |
| Sovereignty Issues | Countries remain cautious about perceived interference in national healthcare decisions. |
Broader Implications
- Global Health Diplomacy: Strengthens the role of international health governance.
- Equity Focus: Aims to prevent a repeat of “vaccine apartheid” witnessed during COVID-19.
- Global Solidarity vs National Interest: Balancing collective good with sovereignty remains a core tension.
Summary
The Global Pandemic Treaty represents a paradigm shift in global health governance. It moves from ad hoc aid-based responses to a rule-based, equity-driven framework, prioritizing collective preparedness over isolated national responses. However, its effectiveness will depend on political will, funding, and enforceable mechanisms.
Exam Connect – Possible Questions
Prelims
1. The new WHO Global Pandemic Treaty includes which of the following provisions?
- Mandatory sharing of pathogen data
- A global fund to support pandemic preparedness
- WHO’s authority to override national healthcare decisions
- Public interest safeguards in pharmaceutical pricing
A. 1, 2 and 4 only
B. 1, 3 and 4 only
C. 2 and 3 only
D. All of the above
Answer: A
2. The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the only other legally binding WHO treaty before 2025, was adopted in:
A. 1995
B. 2003
C. 2010
D. 2015
Answer: B
Mains :
1. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed major gaps in global health preparedness. Critically examine the significance of the proposed WHO Pandemic Treaty in addressing these gaps.
Final Insight
- The Global Pandemic Treaty represents a historic attempt to institutionalize global health solidarity.
- Its success, however, will depend on the genuine commitment of member nations and active public-private partnerships to ensure that future pandemic responses are equitable, timely, and effective.