Editorial 1 : All that can be saved
Introduction: Recently, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) released its 14th Emissions Gap Report (2023). The report detailed how much humanity needs to cut down its carbon emissions to limit the global temperature rise.
What does the emission gap report show?
- The emission gap measures the difference between what will be our emission level by adopting mitigation/adaptation measures as planned compared to what it should be to avoid climate shocks.
- This report gives details of how far the world at large is away from what is required to be done to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees centigrade (oC) by 2100 when compared to the temperature during the pre-industrial period.
- The report was released just before the Committee of the Parties (COP28) meeting in Dubai.
Greenhouse gases and global warming
- The average temperature of Earth has been on the rise because there is a huge amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) being generated from energy-related activities, industry, agriculture and land use and waste.
- GHGs mainly comprise of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide and other synthetic gases.
- CO2 has a dominant share in the total GHGs and its effects can last for more than a century.
- Incidentally, methane is about 28 times more potent than CO2 except that its generation is much lower than CO2 and its ill-effects get wiped out in about 10 years.
- GHGs trap the heat in the atmosphere and prevent it from escaping into the atmosphere, leading to temperature rise.
- Compared to pre-industrial temperature, Earth’s mean temperature has already increased by about 1oC.
- This has caused unprecedented rains, floods, increased droughts, severe storms, cyclones, etc.
Source of greenhouse gas emission
- Most of the CO2 that is being generated is through the burning of fossil fuels for power generation and process heat (43 per cent), transport (20 per cent), manufacturing and construction (18 per cent), buildings (8 per cent), and industry (5 per cent).
- As far as power generation is concerned, to move away from fossil fuels, we need to adopt renewable generation, mainly solar and wind.
- For the transport sector, one needs to move to electric and also hydrogen-based vehicles.
- Replacing fossil fuels in the industrial sector is the most difficult task since renewable energy cannot supply high-intensity heat required for industries like iron and steel and aluminium.
The cost of green transformation
- Moving away from fossil fuels is a capital-intensive process and developing countries are not in a position to fund such activities.
- Hence, there is a need for the developed world to transfer not only finance but also technology.
- The developed world is responsible for the excessive carbon footprints and it is only natural that they pay for the damage.
- Logically, it is the principle of “polluter pays” which should be applicable here.
- Countries like the US have a cumulative CO2 emission which is 25 per cent of the global emissions and the corresponding figures for the EU and China are 22 per cent and 12.7 per cent, respectively.
- As compared to this, India’s cumulative emissions are only 3 per cent.
- In per capita terms also, it is only 1.8 tons, where the world average is 4.7 tons.
The talk on climate finance
- Since the past 15 years or so, there has been talk of transferring resources to the tune of $100 billion per year (which is only about 15 per cent compared to what is required to fund adequate mitigation and adaptation activities) to developing countries.
- But this is not really happening. OECD data, of course, tries to show that almost $80 billion per year is being transferred as of now, but this is really a statistical jugglery.
The warning of emission gap report
- In order to combat climate change, each country has drawn up plans called nationally determined contributions (NDCs).
- The latest emissions gap report of the UNEP has stated that going by the latest NDCs, there is going to be a temperature rise between 2.5oC and 2.9oC by the turn of the century.
- These figures should be seen as indicative only, but they are alarming enough.
- Clearly, more needs to be done. It is against this background that the COP meeting is being held.
- COP28 comes to a close today, but no decision has yet been taken on the most contentious issue — the global stock take report.
Conclusion: This report will decide the way forward for climate change, especially on issues of climate equity and phasing out of fossil fuels. Thankfully, there has been some positive movement on the loss and damage fund which has been operationalised. Hopefully, some agreed text on the GST report would be arrived at.
Editorial 2 : The imprimatur
Introduction: On Monday, the Supreme Court gave its imprimatur to Jammu and Kashmir’s changed position in the Indian Republic, a result of the abrogation of Article 370 on August 5, 2019. It upheld the decision to repeal J&K’s special status.
Background of Article 370
- On October 17, 1949, Article 370 was added to the Indian constitution, as a 'temporary provision', which exempted Jammu & Kashmir, permitting it to draft its own Constitution and restricting the Indian Parliament's legislative powers in the state.
- It was introduced into the draft constitution by N Gopalaswami Ayyangar as Article 306 A.
- Under Article 370: The Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir was empowered to recommend which articles of the Indian Constitution should apply to the state,
- The J&K Constituent Assembly was dissolved after it drafted the state's constitution. Clause 3 of article 370 gives the President of India the power to amend its provisions and scope.
- Article 35A stems from Article 370 and was introduced through a Presidential Order in 1954, on the recommendation of the J&K Constituent Assembly.
- Article 35A empowers the Jammu & Kashmir legislature to define the permanent residents of the state, and their special rights and privileges.
- It appears in Appendix I of the Constitution.
Key Changes by the August 5 Bill
- The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 2019 has replaced Presidential Order of 1954.
- Subsequently, the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill, 2019, passed by Parliament divides the state of Jammu and Kashmir into two new Union Territories (UTs): Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh.
- This was the first time that a state has been converted into a UT.
- Of the six Lok Sabha seats currently with the state of Jammu and Kashmir, five will remain with the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir, while one will be allotted to Ladakh.
- The UT of Jammu and Kashmir will have an Assembly, like in Delhi and Puducherry.
- Instead of 29, India will now have 28 states. Kashmir will no longer have a Governor, rather a Lieutenant Governor like in Delhi or Puducherry.
Supreme Court observation in the case
- The five judge-bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud clarified that Article 370 was intended as a “transitional” arrangement – the bench referred “to the placement of the Article in Part XXI of the Constitution which deals with temporary provisions”.
- The purpose of the Article, as Justice S K Kaul noted in his concurring judgment, “was to slowly bring Jammu and Kashmir on par with the other states of India”.
- At the same time, the bench also said that it could not sit in judgement “on whether the circumstances which led to the arrangement under Article 370 have ceased to exist”.
- This, as it rightly pointed out, “is a policy decision within the realm of the executive”.
- The Court has also delineated the scope of the now-revoked “special status” of J&K: This never amounted to “internal sovereignty distinguishable from the powers and privileges enjoyed by other states”.
- The petitioners had argued that, as per Article 370(3), J&K’s special status could not be changed unless recommended by its Constituent Assembly.
- But the Court ruled that this Constituent Assembly was never intended to be a permanent body.
- It said that Articles 370 (3) and Articles 370(1) were “introduced for enhancing constitutional integration”.
- “The abrogation of Article 370 by the President in the exercise of the power under Article 370 (3) is a culmination of the process of integration,” the SC has ruled.
Significance of SC’s verdict and its limitations
- The next steps, it has underlined — the directive to the Centre to give urgency to restoring statehood and to the Election Commission to conduct polls in J&K by September 30, 2024 — should be read as a part of this larger message.
- This emphasis on the resumption of the democratic processes in J&K should not be lost on the government.
- The Court has, however, let itself down in its interpretation of Article 356, the lynchpin of federalism in India.
- The petitioners had questioned the bifurcation of J&K and its conversion into a Union Territory when Article 356 was in force.
- But the Court’s comments, that every decision and action “taken by the Union executive when the Article is in force is not subject to challenge” attenuates the gravity of the August 5, 2019 decision.
- The apex court’s words — at a time when the idea and practice of federalism is under stress — go against the spirit of its landmark verdict in the SR Bommai case.
- It hurts the checks and balances in Centre-state relations and, perhaps, the court will clarify or fine-tune this at a later stage.
Conclusion: SC affirms J&K's place in the country's federal polity. Its message on the Centre-state balance needs fine-tuning.