‘’Paper 4-GS-III, Topic: Security challenges and their management in border areas; linkages of organized crime with terrorism Various Security forces and agencies and their mandate

Fishermen deaths raise questions over who enforces the law at sea


  • The incident on Sunday in which two Indian fishermen were killed when a bulk cargo vessel rammed into their fishing boat off Kochi raises questions over jurisdiction, investigation and prosecution of the case.

   What happened?

  • A Panama-flagged bulk cargo vessel, Amber L, rammed fishing boat Carmel Matha around 2 a.m. on Sunday, killing two people on board the boat. One fisherman is missing and 11 were rescued.
  • The incident happened in the Kochi-Minicoy shipping channel. The Indian Navy officially confirmed that the accident occurred 30 nautical miles northwest of Kochi coast.
  • The ship was headed for bunkering to a location eight nautical miles from the coast. After the incident, the ship proceeded for bunkering without stopping, say the police said.

   What have the police done?

  • The coastal police in Fort Kochi have registered cases against the vessel’s crew under IPC section 427 (mischief causing damage), 280 (rash navigation of vessel), 338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others) and 304 (causing death by negligence).
  • The captain is a Greek national. The ship has been detained within Kochi port limits with its 28 crew members. The investigation is under way.

   How does this case compare to the Enrica Lexie case?

  • In the Enrica Lexie case, in which 2 Indian fishermen were shot dead by Italian marines on an anti-piracy mission, the incident happened some 20 nautical miles from the coast of Kerala.
  • The Supreme Court ruled that Kerala did not have jurisdiction in the contiguous waters and only the Union had.
  • The Indian Maritime Zone Act, 1976, lays down that the Central government may exercise powers and take measures in relation to security in contiguous waters.
  • In June 2016, the Union government decided to extend the jurisdiction of selected police stations on land from 12 nautical miles to 200 nautical miles into the high seas. Kerala police say that the Fort Kochi police station is among those with jurisdiction up to 200 nautical miles and can proceed with the investigations.

   Source: Hindustan Times

‘’Paper 4-GS-III, Topic: Transport and marketing of agricultural produce and issues and related constraints.

Farmers demand law to protect share croppers’ rights

   You should know:

  • Members of the All India Kisan Mazdoor Sabha (AIKMS) held a demonstration in front of the Revenue Divisional Commissioner’s office in Berhampur, demanding that the State government formulate a strong law to protect the rights of share croppers.
  • The protesters alleged that the State government’s recent effort to formulate a law to recognise share croppers was only an administrative exercise.
  • They criticised the State government for not consulting farmers’ organisations during formulation of the draft of the Bill for the purpose.
  • They handed over a memorandum addressed to the Odisha Chief Minister at the office of the RDC. The memorandum contains suggestions related to the new Act being formulated for share croppers.

   Share croppers:

  • The peasants’ organisation wants the Odisha government to identify share croppers through a strict approach. Like West Bengal, Odisha should also put the ‘burden of proof’ of share cropping on land-owners and land-owners should be penalised if they suppress information about share cropping on their land.
  • The peasants’ organisation opposed to the Niti Aayog’s recommendation that sharing of yield between land-owners and share croppers should be through mutual understanding between the two without any intervention of the government.

   Demands of AIKMS:

  • The All India Kisan Mazdoor Sabha (AIKMS) suggested legal documentation of share cropping through a lease deed between land-owners and share croppers, where the local revenue inspector could be the arbitrator.
  • Lease time of the land under share cropping should be at least five years and at the time of sale of agricultural land, share croppers should get first preference to buy it.
  • They also want identity cards for share croppers to enable them to avail of government facilities like bank loans, crop insurance and sale of yield in government mandis.
  • AIKMS says that till now no survey had been conducted in the State to assess the total land under share cropping.
  • But unofficial sources claim that agricultural land under share cropping in Odisha is more than 50%.

    Source: Indian Express


‘’Paper 3-GS-II, Topic: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Info panel upholds right to inspect court registers

   Under RTI Act:

  • The Tamil Nadu Information Commission has permitted a petitioner to inspect registers maintained by the district and its subordinate courts, thereby setting aside the contention that the Madras High Court alone had to the right to do so.
  • The Commission made the decision while disposing of the plea of Giles Ravichandran who petitioned the Public Information Commissioner (PIO).
  • He pleaded to inspect the register containing the list of succession original petitions under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for 1991 and 1992 of the District Court, Sub-Court and Munsif Court at Madurai.
  • Request was rejected. The PIO rejected the request on the grounds that the Madras High Court alone was the competent authority to inspect the registers of the District Court.
  • No individual has any right to inspect the registers, as seeking in your petition under the Right to Information Act, 2005, without the permission of the Madras High Court
  • The petitioner was asked to submit an application under the Right to Information Act to the Registrar-General of the Madras High Court and obtain permission if he still intended to inspect the registers.
  • PIO’s stand was not sustainable.
  • Under Section 2(j) of the Act, right to information includes the right of inspection of work, documents and records. The term ‘inspection’ here means perusal, and it is not in the nature of an inspection by a superior official.
  • State Chief Information Commissioner said the rejection of the petitioner’s request was not sustainable. Requesting the PIO to grant permission for perusal of the records mentioned by the petitioner.
  • The petitioner might also be allowed to take notes and copies of specific pages/documents requested by him.
  • The perusal should be done under the supervision of the PIO without disturbing the functioning of the office. The order should be complied with before June 15, 2017.

    Source: The Hindu