Editorial 1. In Parliament’s court
Recent Context:
- Recently, A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a high-power committee consisting of the Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India must pick the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs).
- It was long pending demand to bring the reform in election commission to ensure its independency and impartiality during the electoral process.
Historical perspective of the judgment:
- The demand for an independent system for the appointment of members of the Election Commission goes back nearly 50 years.
- It has been repeatedly recommended by The Justice Tarkunde committee 1975; the Dinesh Goswami committee, May 1990; the second administrative reforms commission, January 2007, and by the Law Commission of India in its 255th report of March 2015.
- As, the Elections are the bedrock of democracy and the Commission’s credibility is central to democratic legitimacy. By severely restricting the hold and control of the executive body over the institution, the now-reformed system of appointments ensures that the independence, autonomy and institutional integrity of the Commission are intact and well-protected.
- In most countries, not only is the Opposition consulted but Parliament approves the appointment. The Supreme Court has taken into consideration the system followed in many countries
Significance of judgment:
- Article 324(2) of the Constitution had stipulated that the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners shall be appointed by the President subject to the provisions of any law made in that behalf by Parliament. This hasn’t happened for seven decades.
- The Bench noted that while several political parties have been in power, none of them framed a law or process for appointments to the Election Commission. It said that this is a “lacuna” in law and that making of law under Article 324 of the Constitution is an unavoidable necessity.
- The role of the Election Commission is such that in the modern election process, it can be abused, inter alia, by simply playing with the election schedule.
- The executive, being the sole arm of the state involved in the appointment, ensures that the Commission becomes/remains a partisan body and a branch of the executive. The concept of the power of reciprocity and loyalty to the appointing body is invoked
- Court stated that “A person who is in a state of obligation or feels indebted to the one who appointed him fails the nation and can have no place in the conduct of elections, forming the very foundation of democracy,”
- “it is important that the appointment must not be overshadowed by even a perception that a yes man will decide the fate of democracy and all that it promises.”
New process of electing CEC and ECs will strengthen the democracy:
- This new procedure will ensure greater credibility and impartiality to the institution.
- Most importantly, this will ensure that the perception of neutrality of the Election Commission will be maintained.
- As We know that the institutions must not only be autonomous but also appear to be so for the sake of public perception and trust.
- Therefore, The judgment also brings a certain uniformity in appointment procedures across institutions and statutory bodies responsible for independently maintaining democracy and institutional autonomy.
Certain criticism related to the Judgments:
- Critics of the judgment have brought in the concept of separation of powers. This issue was as far back as 1973 (Golak Nath and others versus State of Punjab and another) when the Supreme Court held that the Constitution is supreme and all authorities function under this supreme law of the land
- Some have accused the court of judicial activism. Certainly not. The Court has not acted suo motu or on a PIL or an appeal or representation on a postcard. It has adjudicated on not one or two but four civil writ petitions. Despite having the power to issue a writ of mandamus, it has refrained from doing so
More Reform that to be brough for further strengthening the Election commission:
- As regards the relief relating to putting in place a permanent secretariat for the Election Commission of India and charging its expenditure to the consolidated fund of India, the Court makes a “fervent appeal” that the Union of India/Parliament “may consider” bringing in necessary changes so that the Commission becomes truly independent.
- The judgment has left some critical issues unresolved like granting the same protection to Election Commissioners from being removed as provided by the Constitution to the Chief Election Commissioner.
- While Justice Ajay Rastogi in his separate judgment mentioned that it is “desirable” that the grounds for removal of the election commissioners shall be the same as that of the Chief Election Commissioner, the protection from removal which is essential for the independence of the commissioners has not been granted
Conclusion:
- Supreme Court order on appointments will enhance Election Commission’s credibility and independency that will strengthen the electoral process.
- However, there is more areas which are to be reformed issues like the criminalisation of politics, the role of money power and the questionable role of the media, these, though important, were at best side issues. It is expected that the remaining issues will be taken care of through comprehensive legislation, which this judgment may trigger.
Editorial 2. How Forest Certification works
Context:
- Large-scale destruction of forests has always been a concern for the environment, but with climate change, deforestation has become a critically sensitive issue globally in recent years.
- Forests absorb large amounts of carbon dioxide that is emitted in various economic activities, keeping a check on global warming.
- Several countries and corporates, keen to present an environment-friendly image, now try to ensure that they avoid consumption of any product that might be the result of deforestation or illegal logging. And Europe and the United States have passed laws that regulate the entry and sale of forest-based products in their markets.
- This is where the certification industry comes in offering a multi-layer audit system that seeks to authenticate the origin, legality, and sustainability of forest-based products such as timber, furniture, handicraft, paper and pulp, rubber, and many more.
Sustainability & Certifications
- Stopping deforestation does not mean forests cannot be harvested in a sustainable manner for the products. In fact, periodic harvesting of trees is necessary and healthy for forests. Trees have a life span, beyond which they die and decay.
- Also, after a certain age, the capacity of trees to absorb carbon dioxide gets saturated.
- Younger and fresher trees are more efficient at capturing carbon dioxide. The problem arises only when trees are felled indiscriminately, and the cutting of forests outpaces their natural regeneration.
International standard for Certification
- There are two major international standards (there are a few other less widely accepted ones as well) for sustainable management of forests and forest-based products.
- One has been developed by Forest Stewardship Council, or FSC;
- the other by Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certifications, or PEFC.
- FSC certification is more popular and in demand, and also more expensive.
- Organisations like FSC or PEFC are only the developers and owners of standards — like, for example, the International Organisation of Standardisation (ISO) or Bureau of International Standards (BIS).
- They are not involved in the evaluation and auditing of the processes being followed by the forest managers or manufacturers or traders of forest-based products. That is the job of certification bodies authorised by FSC or PEFC.
- PEFC does not insist on the use of its own standards. Instead, like its name suggests, it endorses the ‘national’ standards of any country if they are aligned with its own.
- Two main types of certifications are on offer: forest management (FM) and Chain of Custody (CoC).
- CoC certification is meant to guarantee the traceability of a forest product like timber throughout the supply chain from origin to market.
Forest certification in India
- The forest certification industry has been operating in India for the last 15 years.
- Currently, forests in only one state Uttar Pradesh are certified.
- Forty-one divisions of the UP Forest Corporation (UPFC) are PEFC-certified, meaning they are being managed according to standards endorsed by PEFC.
- These standards have been developed by the New Delhi-based nonprofit Network for Certification and Conservation of Forests (NCCF).
- Some other states too obtained certification, but subsequently dropped out. The Bhamragad forest division in Maharashtra was the first to obtain FSC certification for forest management. Later, two divisions in Madhya Pradesh and one in Tripura also obtained FSC certification. UPFC too had FSC certification earlier.
- However, all of these expired over time. Only UPFC extended its certification — but with PEFC. Many agroforestry projects, such as those run by ITC, and several paper mills too have forest management certification. The forests here are meant for captive use of the industry.
India-specific standards
- India allows the export of only processed wood, not timber.
- In fact, the timber harvested from Indian forests is not enough to meet the domestic demand for housing, furniture, and other products.
- The demand for wood in India is 150-170 million cubic metres annually, including 90-100 million cubic metres of raw wood. The rest goes mainly towards meeting the demand for paper and pulp.
- India’s forests contribute just about five million cubic metres of wood every year. Almost 85 per cent of the demand for wood and wood products is met by trees outside forests (ToF). About 10 per cent is imported. India’s wood import bill is Rs 50,000-60,000 crore per year.
- FSC came up with India-specific standards that included certification for ToF. Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav launched the FSC’s India standards in June 2022.
The Govt’s own standards
- Long before private certification bodies set up operations in India, the government had moved to define national standards for the management of forests.
- Based on the recommendations of an expert committee in 2005, the Environment Ministry had asked relevant institutions like the Bhopal-based Indian Institute of Forest Management to draw up national forest standards.
- Considerable work was done, and a draft Cabinet note seeking the government’s approval for setting up such standards was drawn up. However, the effort did not come to fruition.
- As The role of private certification agencies received criticism related to corruption in the private certification space, the Ministry has restarted efforts to develop official national forest standards.
- The government says the “indigenous system of certifications” will be simple, transparent, and easy to adopt, even by small farmers and tree growers. The benchmarks will adhere to internationally accepted norms, but will take into account India’s national circumstances. The purpose is to make available sustainably grown and managed forest products in the domestic market.
Conclusion:
- Forest certification will help in forest conservation along with sustainable use of forest which will a significant step towards environment sustainability and countering the climate change