In this post I reproduce some more of my answers from Civil Services (Mains), 2014. This is a work in progress and will be updated over the next few days. These include both GS as well as my optional, Law. As stated in an earlier post, do not go by the facts here-they may be incorrect. My sole aim here is to put up, as accurately as possible, answers written in the real exam.
GS-III: Question 2: Employability and Job creation
The Theory of Demographic Dividend postulates that a younger, growing but stable population is not an economic burden but a force for good as it increases productivity in a society. India stands to reap this demographic dividend as more than half of its population is under the age of 30 years.
However the utilisation of this dividend requires skill set development to boost employability. Routine mechanical jobs requiring no special skills will not be productive in the long run as these will inevitably give way to mechanisation. By ignoring this vital area, we will end up with nothing other than disguised unemployment or under-unemployment as these members do not make value additions commensurate with their abilities and can be easily replaced.
The question of finding jobs is a vital one that requires a relook at the development paradigm. Clearly, heavy industry based manufacturing growth will do nothing to solve unemployment as our experience in the 50s and 60s shows. Unemployment can be addressed holistically only if we encourage manufacturing based on our core strength-agriculture. This includes food processing, industrial use of agricultural products and encouragement of exports here. This will also prevent the growing stress on urban infrastructure and boost rural wages.
GS III: Question 16: Radicalisation in India
India stands as a solitary example in the post-Colonial world that adopted a secular, liberal model of democracy at birth and has stuck to it for more than six decades since. However this polity is increasingly under threat from both domestic and external factors.
The growing tide of Islamist fanaticism across South Asia in the last two decades has been a spill over from the Superpowers’ ill-advised meddling in Afghanistan coupled with Pakistan’s tacit support to it as a tool against India. The fact that it has found little support among Indian Muslims is a tribute to India’s citizenship model that protects and promotes minority rights. However, certain vested interests have used this external factor to fan communalism among a section of the majority populace in India. India needs to address the two together-a firm disassociation of majority communalism from nationalism coupled with a clear and visible promotion of constitutionally guaranteed minority rights.
Radicalisation feeds on real or perceived maginalisation. This may be economic or social. Anti-discrimination legislation to outlaw biased practices in the housing or job market can be another effective tool.
Law Paper I: Question 1 (e): Separation of Powers
Montesquieu’s doctrine of Separation of Powers is popularly known as the theory of Checks and Balances. It means that the three branches of the Government-the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary are independent of each other and do not intrude upon each other’s turf.
However, this notion of strict separation is not applicable in India. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has remarked in Ram Jawaya Kapur that checks and balances in the Indian Polity do not translate to absolute separation of powers. The Executive here is a part of the Legislature and is directly answerable to it. It stays in power till it enjoys the confidence of the House. This is unlike the situation in the USA where the President is not answerable to the Congress. Delegated Legislation is the norm here and on occasions even the Supreme Court has joined in (for eg-the Visakha guidelines). Therefore while the Indian Constitution promotes answerability, it does not adhere to doctrinal notions of Montesquieu.