Editorial 1 : Peacemaker’s Predicament
Context: PM Modi’s visit to Ukraine.
Introduction: PM Modi is one of the few international leaders to have visited both Moscow and Kyiv. He has constantly advocated the path of diplomacy and dialogue to end Russia’s Ukraine war.
India’s Position
- The dichotomy between PM Modi’s desire for peace and justice in Ukraine and the compulsions of India’s deep interests in Russia has been witnessed since the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
- The Indian side reiterated its principled position and focus on peaceful resolution through dialogue and diplomacy, as a part of which, India has attended the Summit on Peace in Ukraine, held in Burgenstock, Switzerland, in June 2024.
- In the India-Ukraine Joint Statement PM Modi and President Zelenskyy reiterated their readiness for further cooperation in upholding principles of international law, including the UN Charter, such as respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty of states.
- PM Modi reiterated India’s willingness to contribute in all possible ways to facilitate an early return of peace in Ukraine.
Realistic Assessment
- The Indian foreign policy establishment needs to make a realistic assessment if Ukraine and its Western partners want India to go beyond effectively pressing Russia to reverse its aggression.
- Ukraine and West want India, to stop buying Russian oil so that it feels economic pain.
Historical Parallel
- There is a historical parallel going back four decades to what the West and Ukraine want of India at this stage. That parallel lies in the situation which arose in Afghanistan following the Soviet intrusion in 1979.
- India was deeply unhappy with the Russian action but like now, then too, it did not publicly criticise Russia.
- By the mid-1980s, India’s ties warmed up with the US and US urged Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to use his influence on Russia to withdraw from Afghanistan.
- But when India wanted a say in a post-Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, US virtually told India to lay off.
Who can and will ensure peace?
- Even though the Ukraine war has impacted the Global South adversely and has international geopolitical implications involving the US and China, but at its core it is a European war.
- The fact is that on the Ukraine issue, the US and its allies on the one side and China and Russia on the other have locked horns. Ultimately it is they that have to unlock them.
- It may seem that Ukraine and West see a role for other powers including India, but all they want is that India and others condemn Russia and apply economic pressure.
Poor historical ties with Ukraine
- Indian-Ukraine relations got off to a bad start.
- Ukraine supplied Pakistan with over 300 T-80 battle tanks over India’s strenuous objections.
- Ukraine condemned India’s nuclear tests of 1998.
- These actions of Ukraine cast a long shadow over the relationship.
- Also, India’s response to Russia’s Crimea action inhibited an effective growth in ties.
Way Forward: The past should not have been allowed to have a long-term negative impact on bilateral ties. It is for the Ukraine and India to decide how to go forward with their ties without the influence from West and Russia.
Editorial 2 : Court’s Next Step
Context: Supreme Court underlines that jail is the exception, bail is the rule.
Introduction: In Prem Prakash vs Enforcement Directorate, Supreme Court has underlined that the legal principle “jail is the exception, bail is the rule” will apply even in cases registered under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The principle of jail is the exception, bail is the rule
- The principle recognises that prolonged pre-trial incarceration is a punishment in itself.
Change in thinking of court on bail
- The latest verdict signal that on bail, the thinking of the apex court has been shifting for some time now. The shift is welcome — and overdue.
- Two years ago, in the consequential Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary v Union of India ruling, the SC had upheld the stringent provisions of the PMLA.
- The Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary ruling is still the law of the land. However, since then, several small but significant rulings by the Court have taken the sting out of the verdict.
SC rulings regarding ED to brush aside the fears of misuse
- In October 2023, SC held that informing the grounds on which a person is arrested in writing “would be necessary, henceforth” for the ED.
- The court directed that a copy be furnished to the arrested person, without exception, as a matter of course.
- This was a departure from the Vijay Madanlal ruling, which had said that the sharing of the ECIR with the accused, akin to an FIR for the ED, was not mandatory.
- The Court held that the ED official’s “reasons to believe” that a person is “guilty of the offence” in order to make an arrest must also be given in writing to the accused. A written record allows the accused to challenge an illegal arrest in court.
Court’s decision on bail
- In recent cases, the court has side-stepped a narrow reading of the law regarding bail.
- It said that delay in trial had to be read into the bail law, and that the law can be “relaxed” if the accused has undergone a long period of incarceration.
- In Ajay Ajit Peter Kerkar vs Directorate of Enforcement, the SC extended the principle that a person who has spent half of the maximum sentence as an undertrial shall be released on bail, even in money laundering offences.
Way Forward
- The recent interventions by the Court come amidst disquiet caused by a surge in the Centre’s use of the Enforcement Directorate against political opponents.
- These interventions strengthen the procedural safeguards for an accused, but the Court still needs to comprehensively revisit the 2022 ruling in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary v Union of India.