Daily Current Affairs 02-10-2026

Restoring Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir, A Test of Federalism, Democracy, and Constitutional Morality

Why in News?

In a resolution passed on September 28, 2026, the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly called upon the Government of India for the “immediate and urgent restoration of full Statehood” to the nearly seven-year-old Union Territory (UT). The erstwhile State of J&K was downgraded and carved out into two UTs in 2019 when the Centre decided to end the region’s close to 70 years of special constitutional status. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah moved the resolution with a reminder of the past resolutions adopted by the Assembly over the demand of special status. It mentioned the greater autonomy resolution of June 26, 2000, and the special status resolution of November 6, 2024. Other than the 29 BJP legislators, the members of the 90-member House broadly supported the resolution after an intense and high-pitched debate on Statehood and special status. It was a rare bid by Mr. Abdullah on Statehood since he won the election two years ago. Both the ruling alliance parties, the Congress, CPI(M) and Independents, as well as the Opposition parties, including the Peoples Democratic Party, J&K Peoples Conference, Aam Aadmi Party and Awami Ittehad Party extended their support to the demand.

Introduction

The demand for the restoration of Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir is not merely a political issue; it is a fundamental question about the nature of Indian federalism, the promise of democratic governance, and the healing of a wounded region. The 2019 decision to downgrade J&K from a full-fledged State to a Union Territory was unprecedented and, as the article argues, unhealthy. While the government justified the move on grounds of national security and the need to end militancy, the people of J&K have endured a long and painful wait for the restoration of their democratic rights.

The 2024 Assembly elections were a turning point. Voters in Kashmir shunned boycott politics and J&K recorded 63.88% voting. It was the most peaceful election with not a bullet fired, a first in the past three decades. The Centre should have reciprocated the people’s faith in the democratic set-up by empowering the legislature they voted for. The first step in that direction is the restoration of Statehood. This article analyses the key issues raised by the resolution, the constitutional and governance dimensions, and the way forward for a just and durable resolution.

Background

The 2019 Reorganisation: A Watershed Moment

The erstwhile State of J&K was downgraded and carved out into two UTs in 2019 when the Centre decided to end the region’s close to 70 years of special constitutional status. The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, bifurcated the State into the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir (with a legislature) and Ladakh (without a legislature). This was a watershed moment in the constitutional history of India, as it was the first time that a full-fledged State was downgraded to a Union Territory.

The Three-Step Path

The Centre itself laid down a three-step path for the restoration of Statehood: delimitation, election and Statehood. The Supreme Court of India had sought the restoration of Statehood “as soon as possible”, while Prime Minister Narendra Modi had promised the same “at the appropriate time”, both in Parliament and outside it. Still, the wait has been too long for not only the people of J&K, but for all those who value democracy and federalism.

The 2024 Assembly Elections: A Mandate for Change

The 2024 elections were an unprecedented departure from the past. Voters in Kashmir shunned boycott politics and J&K recorded 63.88% voting. It was the most peaceful election with not a bullet fired, a first in the past three decades. The Centre should have reciprocated the people’s faith in the democratic set-up by empowering the legislature they voted for.

The Resolution of September 28, 2026

In a resolution passed on September 28, 2026, the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly called upon the Government of India for the “immediate and urgent restoration of full Statehood”. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah moved the resolution with a reminder of the past resolutions adopted by the Assembly over the demand of special status. Other than the 29 BJP legislators, the members of the 90-member House broadly supported the resolution after an intense and high-pitched debate on Statehood and special status.

Key Issues Raised

1. The Unprecedented Downgrading of a State

The article argues that the downgrading of J&K from a full-fledged functional State to a UT was unprecedented and unhealthy. No doubt, J&K went through three decades of tumultuous times, as militant violence and deaths became the order of the day. However, the 2024 elections were an unprecedented departure from the past.

2. The Need to Reciprocate the People’s Faith

The article argues that the Centre should have reciprocated the people’s faith in the democratic set-up by empowering the legislature they voted for. The first step in that direction is the restoration of Statehood.

3. The Scarred and Painful Past of J&K

The article highlights that the scarred and painful past of J&K needs healing. It is high time that the Court’s direction on Statehood be respected and implemented without delay.

4. The Role of the Legislature

The article argues that an empowered legislature rather than the streets, should become the space for conversation with the Centre on J&K. J&K should not be allowed to drift away from the federal and democratic process in India.

5. The Fallacy of Predicating Statehood on the End of Militancy

The article argues that to predicate restoration of Statehood on the end of militancy is, as Mr. Abdullah indicated, equivalent to giving Pakistan and its strategy of state-sponsored terrorism a say in the matter.

6. The Broad Support for the Resolution

The article highlights that other than the 29 BJP legislators, the members of the 90-member House broadly supported the resolution. Both the ruling alliance parties, the Congress, CPI(M) and Independents, as well as the Opposition parties, including the Peoples Democratic Party, J&K Peoples Conference, Aam Aadmi Party and Awami Ittehad Party extended their support to the demand. This demonstrates the broad-based nature of the demand for Statehood.

Timeline of Events

• June 26, 2000: J&K Assembly passes the greater autonomy resolution.

• 2019: J&K is downgraded and carved out into two UTs under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.

• 2024: J&K Assembly passes the special status resolution on November 6.

• 2024: J&K records 63.88% voting in the Assembly elections.

• September 28, 2026: J&K Assembly passes a resolution calling for the immediate and urgent restoration of full Statehood.

• Recent: The Supreme Court seeks the restoration of Statehood “as soon as possible”.

• Recent: Prime Minister Narendra Modi promises the restoration of Statehood “at the appropriate time”.

Government Response

• Three-Step Path: The Centre itself laid down a three-step path for the restoration of Statehood: delimitation, election and Statehood.

• Supreme Court: The Supreme Court of India had sought the restoration of Statehood “as soon as possible”.

• Prime Minister: Prime Minister Narendra Modi had promised the same “at the appropriate time”, both in Parliament and outside it.

• BJP Legislators: The 29 BJP legislators did not support the resolution.

Judicial Developments

• Supreme Court Direction: The Supreme Court of India had sought the restoration of Statehood “as soon as possible”. The article argues that it is high time that the Court’s direction on Statehood be respected and implemented without delay.

Constitutional & Governance Dimensions

• Article 3: Parliament can alter the boundaries of States and UTs.

• Article 370: The special status of J&K was abrogated in 2019.

• Article 356: President’s Rule was imposed in J&K before the 2019 reorganisation.

• Federalism: The downgrading of J&K from a State to a UT is a violation of the principles of federalism.

• Democracy: The restoration of Statehood is essential for the democratic empowerment of the people of J&K.

• Governance: The article highlights the need for better governance of J&K.

Social and Political Significance

• Democratic Aspirations: The restoration of Statehood is a key demand of the people of J&K.

• Political Stability: The restoration of Statehood is essential for political stability in the region.

• Healing: The restoration of Statehood is a step towards healing the scarred and painful past of J&K.

• National Integration: The restoration of Statehood is essential for the integration of J&K with the rest of India.

• Political Sensitivity: The issue of Statehood is politically sensitive.

Challenges

1. National Security: The need to balance national security with the demand for Statehood.

2. Militancy: The persistence of militancy in the region.

3. Political Polarization: The political polarization on the issue of Statehood.

4. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to restore Statehood.

5. Pakistan’s Role: Pakistan’s strategy of state-sponsored terrorism.

6. Delay: The delay in the restoration of Statehood has led to frustration among the people of J&K.

Way Forward

1. Respect the Court’s Direction: The Court’s direction on Statehood should be respected and implemented without delay.

2. Reciprocate the People’s Faith: The Centre should reciprocate the people’s faith in the democratic set-up by empowering the legislature they voted for.

3. Empower the Legislature: An empowered legislature rather than the streets, should become the space for conversation with the Centre on J&K.

4. Do Not Predicate Statehood on the End of Militancy: To predicate restoration of Statehood on the end of militancy is equivalent to giving Pakistan and its strategy of state-sponsored terrorism a say in the matter.

5. Heal the Past: The scarred and painful past of J&K needs healing.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to restore Statehood.

Conclusion

The resolution passed by the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly on September 28, 2026, calling for the immediate and urgent restoration of full Statehood, is a powerful reminder of the democratic aspirations of the people of J&K. The 2019 decision to downgrade J&K from a full-fledged State to a UT was unprecedented and unhealthy. The 2024 Assembly elections were a turning point, with voters shunning boycott politics and recording 63.88% voting.

The way forward requires a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the constitutional and the political dimensions of the challenge. It requires respecting the Court’s direction, reciprocating the people’s faith, empowering the legislature, not predicating Statehood on the end of militancy, healing the past, and political will.

The time for action is now. The future of J&K and its integration with the rest of India depends on the choices made today.

5 UPSC-Style Questions & Answers

Q1. “J&K should be given its Statehood without any further delay.” Discuss this statement in the context of the recent resolution passed by the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly.
Answer: The statement is accurate. J&K should be given its Statehood without any further delay.
Key Issues:

1. Unprecedented Downgrading: The downgrading of J&K from a full-fledged functional State to a UT was unprecedented and unhealthy.

2. People’s Faith: The Centre should have reciprocated the people’s faith in the democratic set-up by empowering the legislature they voted for.

3. Court’s Direction: The Supreme Court of India had sought the restoration of Statehood “as soon as possible”.

4. Prime Minister’s Promise: Prime Minister Narendra Modi had promised the same “at the appropriate time”.
   The way forward requires respecting the Court’s direction and reciprocating the people’s faith.

Q2. Discuss the constitutional and governance dimensions of the downgrading of Jammu and Kashmir from a State to a Union Territory.
Answer: The constitutional and governance dimensions of the downgrading of J&K are:

1. Article 3: Parliament can alter the boundaries of States and UTs.

2. Article 370: The special status of J&K was abrogated in 2019.

3. Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019: Bifurcated the State into two UTs.

4. Federalism: The downgrading of J&K from a State to a UT is a violation of the principles of federalism.

5. Democracy: The restoration of Statehood is essential for the democratic empowerment of the people of J&K.
   The way forward requires respecting the principles of federalism and democracy.

Q3. “The 2024 Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir were a turning point.” Critically examine this statement.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The 2024 Assembly elections in J&K were a turning point.
Key Issues:

1. Shunning Boycott Politics: Voters in Kashmir shunned boycott politics.

2. High Voter Turnout: J&K recorded 63.88% voting.

3. Peaceful Election: It was the most peaceful election with not a bullet fired, a first in the past three decades.

4. Mandate for Change: The election was a mandate for change.
   The way forward requires reciprocating the people’s faith in the democratic set-up.

Q4. What are the key challenges in restoring Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir? Suggest measures to address these challenges.
Answer: The key challenges in restoring Statehood to J&K are:

1. National Security: The need to balance national security with the demand for Statehood.

2. Militancy: The persistence of militancy in the region.

3. Political Polarization: The political polarization on the issue of Statehood.

4. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to restore Statehood.

5. Pakistan’s Role: Pakistan’s strategy of state-sponsored terrorism.
   Measures to address these challenges:

6. Respect the Court’s Direction: The Court’s direction on Statehood should be respected.

7. Reciprocate the People’s Faith: The Centre should reciprocate the people’s faith.

8. Empower the Legislature: An empowered legislature should become the space for conversation.

9. Do Not Predicate Statehood on the End of Militancy: This is equivalent to giving Pakistan a say in the matter.

10. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will.

Q5. “The time for action is now.” In light of this statement, suggest a comprehensive strategy for India to restore Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir and ensure its integration with the rest of the country.
Answer: A comprehensive strategy for India to restore Statehood to J&K and ensure its integration with the rest of the country must include:

1. Respect the Court’s Direction: The Court’s direction on Statehood should be respected and implemented without delay.

2. Reciprocate the People’s Faith: The Centre should reciprocate the people’s faith in the democratic set-up by empowering the legislature they voted for.

3. Empower the Legislature: An empowered legislature rather than the streets, should become the space for conversation with the Centre on J&K.

4. Do Not Predicate Statehood on the End of Militancy: To predicate restoration of Statehood on the end of militancy is equivalent to giving Pakistan and its strategy of state-sponsored terrorism a say in the matter.

5. Heal the Past: The scarred and painful past of J&K needs healing.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to restore Statehood.
   The time for action is now. The future of J&K and its integration with the rest of India depends on the choices made today.

In Chess Olympiad, India Coming Second to Uzbekistan Should Not Be Dispiriting

Why in News?

When the Indian men finish as the runner-up and the women secure third place in one of the world’s biggest sporting events, it calls for celebration. But, when the fact is that those performances did not quite live up to the expectations, it says a lot about the reputation India enjoys as a chess giant. The Indians’ show at the Chess Olympiad, which concluded at Samarkand on Sunday, is no doubt commendable, as they retained the Gaprindashvili Trophy, awarded to the best country overall, and claimed six individual medals as well. In a tournament in which more than 200 countries took part, that is no small feat. Still, for a nation that had won both the open and women’s titles two years ago in Budapest, the failure to defend even one is a bit of a disappointment. This development has sparked a debate about India’s performance, the rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse, and the future of Indian chess.

Introduction

The Chess Olympiad is the premier team chess event in the world, bringing together the best players from over 200 countries. For India, a nation with a rich chess heritage and a growing reputation as a global chess powerhouse, the Olympiad is a critical test of its talent, depth, and strategy. The recent Olympiad at Samarkand was a mixed bag for India. While the men finished as runner-up and the women secured third place, the failure to defend either title was a disappointment. However, the article argues that this should not be dispiriting. The performances of individual players, particularly the young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh, offer hope for the future. This article analyses the key issues raised by the article, the significance of India’s performance, and the way forward for Indian chess.

Background

The 2026 Chess Olympiad at Samarkand

The Chess Olympiad concluded at Samarkand on Sunday. The Indian men finished as the runner-up, while the women secured third place. The Indians retained the Gaprindashvili Trophy, awarded to the best country overall, and claimed six individual medals as well. In a tournament in which more than 200 countries took part, that is no small feat.

The Expectations vs. Reality

For a nation that had won both the open and women’s titles two years ago in Budapest, the failure to defend even one is a bit of a disappointment. The Indian men were seeded second, while the women had the top billing. So, the men played according to their ranking, as the host Uzbekistan, the only country that could challenge India when it comes to the depth of young chess talent, emerged as the champion. The clash between the two teams was the most anticipated one at the tournament, and it was always going to be crucial. So it proved.

The Men’s Competition

Uzbekistan beat India in the sixth round, moved into the sole position, and inched towards the gold; not even a shocking defeat to Germany mattered in the end. The Indian men’s team, despite being seeded second, could not overcome the challenge posed by the host nation.

The Women’s Competition

The Indian women’s winning run had been stopped in the fifth round, by Poland. They had to fight hard then to win even bronze. The Chinese women were the deserving winners, even though they had not fielded some of their best players. That four Indian women – out of the five – won individual medals proves it was a fine team effort, and yet B. Savitha Shri stood out.

The Rise of B. Savitha Shri

The Chennai teenager was making her Olympiad debut, coming in place of the vastly experienced D. Harika, who chose to stay away this time, and she was brilliant right through the event. Of her 10 games, she won eight and drew the other two. Savitha deserves all the support she requires to make further progress on the chessboard. Remember, India does not have the kind of bench strength in women’s chess that it possesses in the men’s game.

The Resilience of D. Gukesh

D. Gukesh, though playing on the fourth board, could not have timed his individual silver better: after becoming the youngest World champion in history in 2024, he has had a tough time. He is defending his crown against Uzbekistan’s Javokhir Sindarov in the match starting in Geneva on November 24. The Olympiad would only have helped him recover some of his confidence and persistence.

Key Issues Raised

1. The Expectation vs. Reality Gap

The article highlights the gap between expectations and reality. India, having won both titles in 2022, was expected to defend at least one. The failure to do so is a disappointment. However, the article argues that this should not be dispiriting, given the strong performance of individual players and the overall team effort.

2. The Rise of Uzbekistan as a Chess Powerhouse

The article highlights the rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse. Uzbekistan, the host nation, emerged as the champion in the men’s competition. The article notes that Uzbekistan is the only country that could challenge India when it comes to the depth of young chess talent.

3. The Importance of Bench Strength

The article highlights the importance of bench strength. India does not have the kind of bench strength in women’s chess that it possesses in the men’s game. This is a key challenge that needs to be addressed.

4. The Performance of Young Talents

The article highlights the performance of young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh. Savitha Shri, making her Olympiad debut, won eight of her 10 games and drew the other two. Gukesh, playing on the fourth board, won an individual silver. These performances offer hope for the future.

5. The Need for Support and Investment

The article argues that players like Savitha Shri deserve all the support they require to make further progress. This requires greater investment in chess infrastructure, coaching, and player development.

6. The Significance of the Gaprindashvili Trophy

The article highlights that India retained the Gaprindashvili Trophy, awarded to the best country overall. This is a significant achievement, demonstrating India’s overall strength in chess.

Timeline of Events

• 2022: India wins both the open and women’s titles at the Chess Olympiad in Budapest.

• 2024: D. Gukesh becomes the youngest World champion in history.

• 2026: Chess Olympiad held at Samarkand.

• 2026: Indian men finish as runner-up; women secure third place.

• 2026: India retains the Gaprindashvili Trophy and claims six individual medals.

• November 24, 2026: D. Gukesh defends his crown against Uzbekistan’s Javokhir Sindarov in Geneva.

Government Response

The provided article does not detail specific government responses to India’s performance in the Chess Olympiad. However, it implies that greater support and investment are needed for player development, particularly in women’s chess.

Judicial Developments

The provided article does not mention any specific judicial developments related to the Chess Olympiad or Indian chess.

Constitutional & Governance Dimensions

• Article 51A: Fundamental duty to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity.

• Sports Governance: The article highlights the need for better governance of sports in India.

• Promotion of Sports: The government has a responsibility to promote sports and provide infrastructure and support for athletes.

• Federalism: Sports is a shared responsibility between the center and states.

Social and Political Significance

• National Pride: India’s performance in the Chess Olympiad is a source of national pride.

• Youth Inspiration: The performance of young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh inspires the youth.

• Gender Equality: The article highlights the need for greater investment in women’s chess.

• Sports Culture: The article highlights the need to promote a culture of sports in India.

• Global Recognition: India’s performance enhances its global recognition as a chess powerhouse.

Challenges

1. Expectation Pressure: The pressure of expectations can be debilitating for players.

2. Lack of Bench Strength: India does not have the kind of bench strength in women’s chess that it possesses in the men’s game.

3. Lack of Support: Players like Savitha Shri deserve all the support they require to make further progress.

4. Rise of Competitors: The rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse poses a challenge to India’s dominance.

5. Lack of Infrastructure: There is a need for greater investment in chess infrastructure.

6. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to promote chess.

Way Forward

1. Invest in Chess Infrastructure: The government should invest in chess infrastructure, coaching, and player development.

2. Promote Women’s Chess: The government should promote women’s chess by providing greater support and opportunities.

3. Support Young Talents: The government should support young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh.

4. Promote a Sports Culture: The government should promote a culture of sports in India.

5. Learn from Competitors: India should learn from the rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to promote chess.

Conclusion

The article argues that India’s performance in the Chess Olympiad should not be dispiriting. While the failure to defend either title is a disappointment, the overall performance, including the retention of the Gaprindashvili Trophy and the six individual medals, is commendable. The performances of young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh offer hope for the future.

The way forward requires a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the structural and the institutional dimensions of chess promotion. It requires investing in chess infrastructure, promoting women’s chess, supporting young talents, promoting a sports culture, learning from competitors, and political will.

The time for action is now. The future of Indian chess depends on the choices made today.

5 UPSC-Style Questions & Answers

Q1. “In Chess Olympiad, India coming second to Uzbekistan should not be dispiriting.” Discuss this statement in the context of India’s performance in the tournament.
Answer: The statement is accurate. India coming second to Uzbekistan should not be dispiriting.
Key Issues:

1. Commendable Performance: The Indians retained the Gaprindashvili Trophy, awarded to the best country overall, and claimed six individual medals.

2. Expectation vs. Reality: For a nation that had won both titles two years ago, the failure to defend even one is a bit of a disappointment.

3. Rise of Uzbekistan: Uzbekistan, the host nation, emerged as the champion.

4. Individual Brilliance: B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh won individual medals.
   The way forward requires investing in chess infrastructure and supporting young talents.

Q2. Discuss the significance of the rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse. What are the implications for India?
Answer: The rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse is significant.
Key Issues:

1. Host Nation: Uzbekistan, the host nation, emerged as the champion in the men’s competition.

2. Depth of Talent: Uzbekistan is the only country that could challenge India when it comes to the depth of young chess talent.

3. Implications for India: The rise of Uzbekistan poses a challenge to India’s dominance.
   The way forward requires learning from competitors and investing in chess infrastructure.

Q3. “The performance of young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh offers hope for the future of Indian chess.” Critically examine this statement.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The performance of young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh offers hope for the future of Indian chess.
Key Issues:

1. B. Savitha Shri: The Chennai teenager was making her Olympiad debut and won eight of her 10 games.

2. D. Gukesh: Playing on the fourth board, he won an individual silver.

3. Need for Support: Players like Savitha Shri deserve all the support they require to make further progress.

4. Bench Strength: India does not have the kind of bench strength in women’s chess that it possesses in the men’s game.
   The way forward requires supporting young talents and promoting women’s chess.

Q4. What are the key challenges facing Indian chess? Suggest measures to address these challenges.
Answer: The key challenges facing Indian chess are:

1. Expectation Pressure: The pressure of expectations can be debilitating for players.

2. Lack of Bench Strength: India does not have the kind of bench strength in women’s chess.

3. Lack of Support: Players deserve all the support they require to make further progress.

4. Rise of Competitors: The rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse poses a challenge.
   Measures to address these challenges:

5. Invest in Chess Infrastructure: The government should invest in chess infrastructure.

6. Promote Women’s Chess: The government should promote women’s chess.

7. Support Young Talents: The government should support young talents.

8. Promote a Sports Culture: The government should promote a culture of sports.

9. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will.

Q5. “The time for action is now.” In light of this statement, suggest a comprehensive strategy for India to become a global chess powerhouse.
Answer: A comprehensive strategy for India to become a global chess powerhouse must include:

1. Invest in Chess Infrastructure: The government should invest in chess infrastructure, coaching, and player development.

2. Promote Women’s Chess: The government should promote women’s chess by providing greater support and opportunities.

3. Support Young Talents: The government should support young talents like B. Savitha Shri and D. Gukesh.

4. Promote a Sports Culture: The government should promote a culture of sports in India.

5. Learn from Competitors: India should learn from the rise of Uzbekistan as a chess powerhouse.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to promote chess.
   The time for action is now. The future of Indian chess depends on the choices made today.

The United Nations’ Long Road to Restoring Trust, Navigating a Crisis of Legitimacy and Effectiveness

Why in News?

As world leaders gathered in New York for the high-level week of the 81st United Nations General Assembly, they debated an increasingly urgent question: trust. This year’s theme, chosen by wide-ranging consultations, was: “Restoring Trust, Managing Transformation: a UN that delivers for all” – with “restoration” suggesting a collapse of trust. The article by Raja Karthikeva, Adjunct Fellow at the Takshashila Institution, provides a comprehensive analysis of the trust deficit facing the United Nations. It argues that the world has historically been a low-trust society, and mistrust between nations has fuelled conflict throughout history. The UN was hence established after the Second World War to make the actions of nation-states more predictable, by creating a space for dialogue and an elaborate scaffolding of international law. The UN has been one of humanity’s greatest achievements precisely because of its ability to build and channel trust between nations. However, over the past three decades, that ability has frayed.

Introduction

The United Nations, established in the aftermath of the Second World War, was conceived as a beacon of hope for a world ravaged by conflict. Its primary purpose was to maintain international peace and security, foster friendly relations among nations, and promote social progress and better standards of life. For decades, the UN has been the cornerstone of the international rules-based order, providing a platform for dialogue, diplomacy, and collective action. However, in recent years, the organisation has faced a deepening crisis of trust. Surveys show that both trust in and favourability towards the UN have declined in the countries surveyed. A new poll by the non-profit UN Foundation found that 52% of respondents feel the UN is struggling to deliver results and want deep structural reform. Well over half believe that it has struggled to enforce international law and protect human rights, and that it is dominated by a few powerful countries.

This article analyses the key issues raised by the article, including the four main reasons for the trust deficit, the constitutional and governance dimensions, and the way forward for restoring trust in the United Nations.

Background

The Erosion of Trust

Over the past three decades, the UN’s ability to build and channel trust between nations has frayed. Where once UN staff designed and seeded “trust-building” approaches between conflicting parties as part of peacebuilding, today the organisation is in a place where it needs to restore trust in its own approaches. Two surveys conducted last year by Edelman Trust and Pew found that both trust in and favourability towards the UN had declined in the countries surveyed.

A new poll by the non-profit UN Foundation found that 52% of respondents feel the UN is struggling to deliver results and want deep structural reform. Well over half believe that it has struggled to enforce international law and protect human rights, and that it is dominated by a few powerful countries. Another poll by the Rockefeller Foundation and Focaldata suggests that only 58% think that the UN can lead efforts to solve global problems, potentially a historic low for the organisation.

The Four Reasons for the Trust Deficit

The article identifies at least four reasons for this situation:

1. The Persistent Deadlock in the UN Security Council (UNSC)
The persistent deadlock in the UNSC has eroded the General Assembly’s trust in the UNSC, so much that a resolution was passed (A/76/262) requiring the UNSC’s permanent members to explain each new use of veto to the Assembly.

2. Questions About the Integrity and Oversight of the UN’s Internal Processes
Questions persist about the integrity and oversight of the UN’s internal processes ranging from recruitment, procurement to allocation of resources. When high-profile controversies such as a procurement scandal in Afghanistan (2013) or sexual exploitation and abuse cases involving peacekeepers (2017) or contracts for non-existent housing projects in Ghana and India (2021) broke out in the UN, the blame was placed on individuals but systemic accountability was seldom addressed. Consequences for individual malfeasance have been limited.

3. Financial Muscle is a Factor
A few countries have come to prevail over the UN system on the strength of their financial contributions. They wield influence through advocacy for their nationals to be recruited into the system, extra-budgetary grants for cherry-picked UN programmes or a combination of the two. For instance, a 2024 report of the UN’s highest financial oversight body (ACABQ) pointed out that in one UN agency, eight out of nine technical experts recruited were sponsored by a single government. In such a case, can the policies recommended to a beneficiary country by the entity be deemed completely neutral? The UN development system’s transparency about its own programme spending too is increasingly limited to these donor governments and not to the public of their beneficiary countries. When it comes to preventing conflict, a fear of upsetting these powerful countries – which in turn could affect contributions as well as individual careers – has made the UN bureaucracy increasingly risk-averse and hesitant.

4. The Underrepresentation of the Global South
Though the bulk of the UN’s programme delivery is in the Global South and trust in the UN is higher in the Global South (UN Foundation poll), only a fraction of the decision-making power rests with the Global South. Developing nations, which account for 84% of the world’s population, hold only 44% of UN civil service leadership positions. Only a third of the UN leadership in Africa is African. Only two-fifths of the cities in which various UN entities have headquarters are cities in the Global South. When, as part of a cost-cutting measure, thousands of posts were moved out of New York and Geneva in 2025, cities in the Global South (except those mentioned) got a miss despite their cost advantages.

Key Issues Raised

1. The Decline of Trust in the UN

The article highlights that trust in and favourability towards the UN have declined in the countries surveyed. A new poll by the non-profit UN Foundation found that 52% of respondents feel the UN is struggling to deliver results and want deep structural reform.

2. The Deadlock in the UN Security Council

The article notes that the persistent deadlock in the UNSC has eroded the General Assembly’s trust in the UNSC. A resolution was passed requiring the UNSC’s permanent members to explain each new use of veto to the Assembly.

3. The Lack of Accountability in UN Internal Processes

The article highlights the lack of accountability in UN internal processes. When high-profile controversies broke out, the blame was placed on individuals but systemic accountability was seldom addressed.

4. The Influence of Powerful Countries

The article notes that a few countries have come to prevail over the UN system on the strength of their financial contributions. This has made the UN bureaucracy increasingly risk-averse and hesitant.

5. The Underrepresentation of the Global South

The article highlights the underrepresentation of the Global South in UN decision-making. Developing nations, which account for 84% of the world’s population, hold only 44% of UN civil service leadership positions.

6. The Shrinking Space for UN Action

The article notes that the UN commendably delivered global humanitarian assistance and protection in 2025-26 to 98 million people, or roughly 1.1% of the world population. But aid effectiveness and the proportion of funds transferred to local actors remains an issue. In wars such as Ukraine, Gaza and Iran, the UN made tactical interventions such as keeping grain exports flowing through the Black Sea, or preventing an oil spill in the Red Sea, but could not build on the goodwill thus earned to create mechanisms for the belligerents to sit and talk. Taking the initiative to facilitate peacemaking has become untenably centralised at the highest rungs of the organisation’s bureaucratic ladder.

Timeline of Events

• 1945: UN established after the Second World War.

• 2013: Procurement scandal in Afghanistan.

• 2017: Sexual exploitation and abuse cases involving peacekeepers.

• 2021: Contracts for non-existent housing projects in Ghana and India.

• 2024: Report of the UN’s highest financial oversight body (ACABQ).

• 2025: Thousands of posts moved out of New York and Geneva.

• 2025-26: UN delivered global humanitarian assistance to 98 million people.

• Recent: 81st United Nations General Assembly held in New York.

Government Response

The provided article does not detail specific government responses to the trust deficit in the UN. However, it implies that the UN needs to confront its deepening crisis of trust and undertake deep structural reform.

Judicial Developments

The provided article does not mention any specific judicial developments related to the UN’s trust deficit.

Constitutional & Governance Dimensions

• UN Charter: The foundational treaty of the UN.

• UN Security Council: The primary organ responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security.

• UN General Assembly: The main deliberative, policymaking and representative organ of the UN.

• Governance: The article highlights the need for better governance of the UN.

• Transparency: The article highlights the need for greater transparency in UN internal processes.

• Accountability: The article highlights the need for greater accountability in UN internal processes.

Social and Political Significance

• Global Governance: The UN is the cornerstone of the international rules-based order.

• Peace and Security: The UN’s primary purpose is to maintain international peace and security.

• Human Rights: The UN has struggled to enforce international law and protect human rights.

• Global South: The underrepresentation of the Global South in UN decision-making is a major issue.

• Public Trust: The decline of trust in the UN is a matter of serious concern.

Challenges

1. Deadlock in the UNSC: The persistent deadlock in the UNSC.

2. Lack of Accountability: The lack of accountability in UN internal processes.

3. Influence of Powerful Countries: The influence of a few powerful countries over the UN system.

4. Underrepresentation of the Global South: The underrepresentation of the Global South in UN decision-making.

5. Shrinking Space for UN Action: The shrinking space for UN action in conflicts.

6. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to reform the UN.

Way Forward

1. Enhance Transparency: The UN should enhance transparency in its internal processes.

2. Remake Ties with the People: The UN should remake its ties with the people of the world, and not just the governments.

3. Reform the UNSC: The UNSC should be reformed to reflect the realities of the 21st century.

4. Increase Representation of the Global South: The Global South should be given greater representation in UN decision-making.

5. Improve Aid Effectiveness: The UN should improve aid effectiveness and increase the proportion of funds transferred to local actors.

6. Facilitate Peacemaking: The UN should take the initiative to facilitate peacemaking in conflicts.

7. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to reform the UN.

Conclusion

The article by Raja Karthikeva is a timely and powerful analysis of the trust deficit facing the United Nations. The UN, one of humanity’s greatest achievements, needs to confront its deepening crisis of trust. The way forward requires a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the structural and the institutional dimensions of the challenge. It requires enhancing transparency, remaking ties with the people, reforming the UNSC, increasing representation of the Global South, improving aid effectiveness, facilitating peacemaking, and political will. The time for action is now. The future of global governance and the international rules-based order depends on the choices made today.

5 UPSC-Style Questions & Answers

Q1. “The United Nations is facing a deepening crisis of trust.” Discuss the key reasons for this trust deficit.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The United Nations is facing a deepening crisis of trust.
Key Reasons:

1. Deadlock in the UNSC: The persistent deadlock in the UNSC has eroded the General Assembly’s trust in the UNSC.

2. Lack of Accountability: Questions persist about the integrity and oversight of the UN’s internal processes.

3. Influence of Powerful Countries: A few countries have come to prevail over the UN system on the strength of their financial contributions.

4. Underrepresentation of the Global South: Developing nations, which account for 84% of the world’s population, hold only 44% of UN civil service leadership positions.
   The way forward requires deep structural reform.

Q2. Discuss the issue of underrepresentation of the Global South in the United Nations. What are its implications for global governance?
Answer: The issue of underrepresentation of the Global South in the UN is significant.
Key Issues:

1. Leadership Positions: Developing nations, which account for 84% of the world’s population, hold only 44% of UN civil service leadership positions.

2. Africa: Only a third of the UN leadership in Africa is African.

3. Headquarters: Only two-fifths of the cities in which various UN entities have headquarters are cities in the Global South.

4. Cost-Cutting: When thousands of posts were moved out of New York and Geneva in 2025, cities in the Global South got a miss.
   Implications for Global Governance:

5. Lack of Legitimacy: The UN lacks legitimacy if it does not represent the majority of the world’s population.

6. Ineffective Policies: Policies may not be effective if they do not reflect the needs and priorities of the Global South.
   The way forward requires increasing the representation of the Global South.

Q3. “The influence of powerful countries over the UN system is a major challenge.” Critically examine this statement.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The influence of powerful countries over the UN system is a major challenge.
Key Issues:

1. Financial Contributions: A few countries have come to prevail over the UN system on the strength of their financial contributions.

2. Recruitment: A 2024 report of the UN’s highest financial oversight body (ACABQ) pointed out that in one UN agency, eight out of nine technical experts recruited were sponsored by a single government.

3. Transparency: The UN development system’s transparency about its own programme spending is increasingly limited to these donor governments.

4. Risk-Averse Bureaucracy: A fear of upsetting these powerful countries has made the UN bureaucracy increasingly risk-averse and hesitant.
   The way forward requires enhancing transparency and accountability.

Q4. What are the key challenges facing the United Nations in the 21st century? Suggest measures to address these challenges.
Answer: The key challenges facing the UN in the 21st century are:

1. Deadlock in the UNSC: The persistent deadlock in the UNSC.

2. Lack of Accountability: The lack of accountability in UN internal processes.

3. Influence of Powerful Countries: The influence of a few powerful countries over the UN system.

4. Underrepresentation of the Global South: The underrepresentation of the Global South in UN decision-making.

5. Shrinking Space for UN Action: The shrinking space for UN action in conflicts.
   Measures to address these challenges:

6. Enhance Transparency: The UN should enhance transparency in its internal processes.

7. Remake Ties with the People: The UN should remake its ties with the people of the world.

8. Reform the UNSC: The UNSC should be reformed.

9. Increase Representation of the Global South: The Global South should be given greater representation.

10. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will.

Q5. “The time for action is now.” In light of this statement, suggest a comprehensive strategy for India to contribute to the reform of the United Nations.
Answer: A comprehensive strategy for India to contribute to the reform of the UN must include:

1. Advocate for Reform: India should advocate for reform of the UNSC and other UN bodies.

2. Increase Representation: India should push for greater representation of the Global South in UN decision-making.

3. Enhance Transparency: India should advocate for greater transparency in UN internal processes.

4. Improve Aid Effectiveness: India should work to improve aid effectiveness and increase the proportion of funds transferred to local actors.

5. Facilitate Peacemaking: India should take the initiative to facilitate peacemaking in conflicts.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to reform the UN.
   The time for action is now. The future of global governance and the international rules-based order depends on the choices made today.

Surveillance Is Not the Only Privacy Issue, The Diffuse Threat to Digital Rights in India

Why in News?

In August 2026, the Supreme Court disposed of a public interest litigation on doxxing and deepfakes, asking the Union Ministries to take remedial measures. Earlier in July, A.A. Rahim, a Rajya Sabha member, petitioned the top court against the Delhi Police’s use of facial recognition and biometric surveillance during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protests. And in May, the Supreme Court upheld the Election Commission’s (EC) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, though critics had warned that it could exclude a large number of eligible voters. While these may look like three unrelated stories, read together, they form a pattern connecting the state, private firms, online networks and the citizens caught among them. This pattern reveals that the privacy debate in India is no longer just about state surveillance; it is about a diffuse ecosystem of data collection, profiling, and targeting that spans the state, private companies, and foreign vendors.

Introduction

Privacy in the digital age is a complex and multifaceted issue. The traditional understanding of privacy as a shield against state surveillance is no longer sufficient. The article by Pankhuri Agarwal, Lecturer and Leverhulme Early Career Fellow at King’s Business School, King’s College London, argues that surveillance is not the only privacy issue. The current moment calls for a different starting point: one that treats surveillance not as a discrete act by an identifiable actor against an identifiable person, but as a diffuse act spread across states, companies, and foreign vendors at once.

This article analyses the key issues raised by the article, including the three kinds of watching, the legal landscape, the constitutional and governance dimensions, and the way forward for a more comprehensive approach to privacy protection in India.

Background

Three Kinds of Watching

The article identifies three kinds of watching that form a pattern of surveillance in India:

1. Facial Recognition and Biometric Surveillance
Facial recognition is the most visible; the State watches people in public and tries to establish who they are. Mr. Rahim’s petition alleges that the police used facial recognition, AI-enabled smart glasses, drones and a mobile command vehicle at Jantar Mantar, and that the data was hosted by two private firms.

2. Doxxing and Online Targeting
The CJP protests revealed a second layer. Women who took part were later targeted online: their personal details were published with reported rape and death threats. Public identification as punishment is not new; in March 2020, the Uttar Pradesh administration put up hoardings in Lucknow with the photographs and addresses of people protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act. The Allahabad High Court ordered them removed, calling the display an “unwarranted interference in privacy”. Today, a hoarding is not needed; a photo can be uploaded, identified, amplified and linked to an address within hours.

3. The SIR and Electoral Roll Watching
The SIR is a third kind of watching, wherein identity checks decide who stays on the electoral roll. The top court has held that the EC may examine citizenship for this limited purpose, though it cannot decide upon citizenship itself. But the scale is considerable: Bihar’s SIR began with about 7.89 crore electors and ended with a final roll of 7.42 crore.

The Legal Landscape

India’s privacy jurisprudence has a powerful foundation. In K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017), a nine-judge Bench held privacy to be a constitutionally protected right. However, Puttaswamy was decided in a case against the state, and its test is framed around state action. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 lets the Union government exempt any state instrumentality from the Act by notification, on grounds which include the security of the state and public order. Consider Pegasus then, the spyware made by an Israeli firm and allegedly used against journalists, activists and others. A court-appointed independent expert committee reported malware in some phones which it examined in 2022, but could not say for sure if it was Pegasus; it also noted that the Union government had not cooperated. Later in 2025, the SC indicated that parts of the report would not be made public.

The result is, therefore, a legal landscape in which the strongest constitutional protection may apply at one point in the chain, while the same person’s information passes through other hands beyond it.

The Key Questions

The article raises several critical questions that India does not have clear answers to:

• Who is responsible when a protester is identified by a camera, doxxed by anonymous accounts, and then threatened at home?

• What happens to privacy when an electoral-roll decision determines whether someone can vote?

• Which safeguard applies when data gathered by the police is held by a private company?

The Historical Context

None of this is new. The state’s interest in identifying individuals predates Aadhaar by more than 150 years. In 1858, William Herschel, a British magistrate, began taking handprints on contracts. The technique was later developed into a fingerprint classification system in Bengal. The technology has changed, but the impulse to make a population identifiable has not. It shows up in Aadhaar, in Delhi’s cameras, and in the SIR. What is different today is the scale and speed.

Key Issues Raised

1. The Diffuse Nature of Surveillance

The article argues that surveillance is no longer a discrete act by an identifiable actor against an identifiable person. It is a diffuse act spread across states, companies, and foreign vendors at once. This makes it difficult to identify who is responsible for privacy violations and how to hold them accountable.

2. The Role of Private Companies

The article highlights the role of private companies in the surveillance ecosystem. The data gathered by the police may be held by a private company. This raises questions about which safeguard applies when data gathered by the police is held by a private company.

3. The Doxxing and Online Targeting of Women

The article highlights the doxxing and online targeting of women who took part in the CJP protests. Their personal details were published with reported rape and death threats. This is a form of gender-based violence that is enabled by the digital ecosystem.

4. The SIR and Electoral Roll Watching

The article highlights the SIR as a third kind of watching, wherein identity checks decide who stays on the electoral roll. The scale is considerable: Bihar’s SIR began with about 7.89 crore electors and ended with a final roll of 7.42 crore. This raises questions about the impact of the SIR on the right to vote.

5. The Limitations of the Legal Framework

The article highlights the limitations of the legal framework. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 lets the Union government exempt any state instrumentality from the Act by notification. This creates a legal landscape in which the strongest constitutional protection may apply at one point in the chain, while the same person’s information passes through other hands beyond it.

6. The Historical Continuity of Identification

The article highlights the historical continuity of identification. The state’s interest in identifying individuals predates Aadhaar by more than 150 years. What is different today is the scale and speed.

Timeline of Events

• 1858: William Herschel begins taking handprints on contracts.

• 2017: K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India – Supreme Court holds privacy to be a constitutionally protected right.

• 2020: Uttar Pradesh administration puts up hoardings with photographs and addresses of CAA protesters.

• 2022: Court-appointed independent expert committee reports malware in some phones.

• 2023: Digital Personal Data Protection Act passed.

• 2025: Supreme Court indicates that parts of the Pegasus report would not be made public.

• May 2026: Supreme Court upholds the EC’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

• July 2026: A.A. Rahim petitions the top court against the Delhi Police’s use of facial recognition.

• August 2026: Supreme Court disposes of a public interest litigation on doxxing and deepfakes.

Government Response

• Supreme Court PIL: The Supreme Court disposed of a public interest litigation on doxxing and deepfakes, asking the Union Ministries to take remedial measures.

• Delhi Police: The Delhi Police’s use of facial recognition and biometric surveillance during the CJP protests was challenged in the Supreme Court.

• Election Commission: The Supreme Court upheld the EC’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

• Digital Personal Data Protection Act: The Act lets the Union government exempt any state instrumentality from the Act by notification.

Judicial Developments

• K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017): A nine-judge Bench held privacy to be a constitutionally protected right.

• Allahabad High Court: Ordered the removal of hoardings with photographs and addresses of CAA protesters, calling the display an “unwarranted interference in privacy”.

• Supreme Court (2025): Indicated that parts of the Pegasus report would not be made public.

• Supreme Court (May 2026): Upheld the EC’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

• Supreme Court (August 2026): Disposed of a public interest litigation on doxxing and deepfakes.

Constitutional & Governance Dimensions

• Article 21 (Right to Life): The right to life includes the right to privacy, as held in K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017).

• Article 14 (Equality before Law): The doxxing and online targeting of women is a violation of the right to equality.

• Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression.

• Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: The legal framework for data protection in India.

• Governance: The article highlights the need for better governance of the surveillance ecosystem.

• Accountability: The article highlights the need for greater accountability for privacy violations.

Social and Political Significance

• Chilling Effect: The surveillance ecosystem can have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and expression.

• Gender-Based Violence: The doxxing and online targeting of women is a form of gender-based violence.

• Democratic Participation: The SIR can impact the right to vote and democratic participation.

• Public Trust: The surveillance ecosystem can erode public trust in the state.

• Human Rights: The diffuse nature of surveillance poses a threat to human rights.

Challenges

1. Diffuse Nature of Surveillance: The diffuse nature of surveillance makes it difficult to identify who is responsible.

2. Role of Private Companies: The role of private companies in the surveillance ecosystem.

3. Doxxing and Online Targeting: The doxxing and online targeting of women.

4. The SIR: The SIR and its impact on the right to vote.

5. Limitations of the Legal Framework: The limitations of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act.

6. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to address privacy issues.

Way Forward

1. Comprehensive Legal Framework: Develop a comprehensive legal framework that addresses the diffuse nature of surveillance.

2. Regulate Private Companies: Regulate private companies that are part of the surveillance ecosystem.

3. Address Gender-Based Violence: Address the doxxing and online targeting of women.

4. Protect the Right to Vote: Protect the right to vote from the impact of the SIR.

5. Strengthen the Digital Personal Data Protection Act: Strengthen the Digital Personal Data Protection Act to limit the government’s power to exempt state instrumentalities.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to protect privacy.

Conclusion

The article by Pankhuri Agarwal is a timely and powerful analysis of the diffuse threat to privacy in India. Surveillance is not the only privacy issue. The current moment calls for a different starting point: one that treats surveillance not as a discrete act by an identifiable actor against an identifiable person, but as a diffuse act spread across states, companies, and foreign vendors at once.

The way forward requires a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the structural and the institutional dimensions of the challenge. It requires a comprehensive legal framework, regulation of private companies, addressing gender-based violence, protecting the right to vote, strengthening the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, and political will.

The time for action is now. The future of privacy and digital rights in India depends on the choices made today.

5 UPSC-Style Questions & Answers

Q1. “Surveillance is not the only privacy issue.” Discuss this statement in the context of the three kinds of watching identified in the article.
Answer: The statement is accurate. Surveillance is not the only privacy issue.
Three Kinds of Watching:

1. Facial Recognition: The State watches people in public and tries to establish who they are.

2. Doxxing: Women who took part in the CJP protests were later targeted online; their personal details were published with reported rape and death threats.

3. The SIR: Identity checks decide who stays on the electoral roll.
   The way forward requires a comprehensive legal framework that addresses the diffuse nature of surveillance.

Q2. Discuss the role of private companies in the surveillance ecosystem in India. What are the implications for privacy?
Answer: The role of private companies in the surveillance ecosystem in India is significant.
Key Issues:

1. Data Hosting: The data gathered by the police may be held by a private company.

2. Facial Recognition: Mr. Rahim’s petition alleges that the data was hosted by two private firms.

3. Pegasus: The spyware made by an Israeli firm and allegedly used against journalists, activists and others.
   Implications for Privacy:

4. Lack of Accountability: It is difficult to identify who is responsible for privacy violations.

5. Lack of Safeguards: It is unclear which safeguard applies when data gathered by the police is held by a private company.
   The way forward requires regulating private companies that are part of the surveillance ecosystem.

Q3. “The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 has limitations in protecting privacy.” Critically examine this statement.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 has limitations in protecting privacy.
Key Issues:

1. Exemptions: The Act lets the Union government exempt any state instrumentality from the Act by notification.

2. Grounds: The grounds include the security of the state and public order.

3. Legal Landscape: The result is a legal landscape in which the strongest constitutional protection may apply at one point in the chain, while the same person’s information passes through other hands beyond it.
   The way forward requires strengthening the Digital Personal Data Protection Act.

Q4. What are the key challenges in protecting privacy in the digital age? Suggest measures to address these challenges.
Answer: The key challenges in protecting privacy in the digital age are:

1. Diffuse Nature of Surveillance: The diffuse nature of surveillance makes it difficult to identify who is responsible.

2. Role of Private Companies: The role of private companies in the surveillance ecosystem.

3. Doxxing and Online Targeting: The doxxing and online targeting of women.

4. The SIR: The SIR and its impact on the right to vote.

5. Limitations of the Legal Framework: The limitations of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act.
   Measures to address these challenges:

6. Comprehensive Legal Framework: Develop a comprehensive legal framework.

7. Regulate Private Companies: Regulate private companies.

8. Address Gender-Based Violence: Address the doxxing and online targeting of women.

9. Protect the Right to Vote: Protect the right to vote.

10. Strengthen the DPDP Act: Strengthen the Digital Personal Data Protection Act.

11. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will.

Q5. “The time for action is now.” In light of this statement, suggest a comprehensive strategy for India to protect privacy and digital rights in the digital age.
Answer: A comprehensive strategy for India to protect privacy and digital rights in the digital age must include:

1. Comprehensive Legal Framework: Develop a comprehensive legal framework that addresses the diffuse nature of surveillance.

2. Regulate Private Companies: Regulate private companies that are part of the surveillance ecosystem.

3. Address Gender-Based Violence: Address the doxxing and online targeting of women.

4. Protect the Right to Vote: Protect the right to vote from the impact of the SIR.

5. Strengthen the DPDP Act: Strengthen the Digital Personal Data Protection Act to limit the government’s power to exempt state instrumentalities.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to protect privacy.
   The time for action is now. The future of privacy and digital rights in India depends on the choices made today.

Muthanga Verdict, Whose Death Counts? A Critical Examination of Justice, Adivasi Rights, and State Accountability

Why in News?

On July 31, 2026, the Principal Sessions Court in Wayanad delivered its verdict in the Muthanga case. The Muthanga agitation was a land occupation from early January to February 19, 2003, at the Muthanga Wildlife Sanctuary, led by the Adivasi Gothra Maha Sabha (AGMS) under C.K. Janu and M. Geethanandan, demanding the government to fulfil its 2001 promise to distribute land to landless Adivasi families. On February 19, the government evacuated the protesters through police action, in which one Adivasi (Jogi) and one policeman (Vinod) died. The court found only one man, Ashokan, who has since died, responsible for constable Vinod’s death; the other 56 who were accused were held not guilty. Four leaders, including Mr. Geethanandan, were convicted on a conspiracy charge related to the assault on a surviving officer and sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment. On August 21, the Kerala High Court suspended their sentences and granted them bail pending appeal. However, this case has effectively buried the death of Jogi, an Adivasi man killed on the same morning, in what officials termed as a “death in police operation.” The verdict raises fundamental questions about whose death counts, the nature of justice in cases of state violence against marginalized communities, and the accountability of the state.

Introduction

The Muthanga verdict is not merely a legal judgment; it is a mirror reflecting the deep-rooted inequalities and injustices that plague Indian society. The case, which took 23 years to conclude, produced a trial, 47 witnesses, and a 217-page judgment for Vinod’s death. For Jogi, they produced nothing—not a charge, a witness, or a line of inquiry. This stark disparity in the treatment of two deaths that occurred on the same morning, in the same police operation, reveals a systemic bias that privileges the lives of state actors over those of marginalized Adivasis.

The article by Abhilash Thadathil, Associate Professor at the Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram, provides a powerful critique of the Muthanga verdict and its implications for Adivasi rights, state accountability, and the nature of justice in India. It argues that the questions this trial was asked to settle were drawn up in the 2004 chargesheet. It asks who conspired against Vinod, who assaulted the officers and who caused his death. It does not address Jogi’s death. This silence was fixed in place when investigators first decided what the case would and would not be about.

This article analyses the key issues raised by the article, the constitutional and governance dimensions, and the way forward for a more just and equitable society.

Background

The Muthanga Agitation

The Muthanga agitation was a land occupation from early January to February 19, 2003, at the Muthanga Wildlife Sanctuary, led by the Adivasi Gothra Maha Sabha (AGMS) under C.K. Janu and M. Geethanandan. The agitation demanded the government to fulfil its 2001 promise to distribute land to landless Adivasi families.

The Police Action and the Deaths

On February 19, the government evacuated the protesters through police action, in which one Adivasi (Jogi) and one policeman (Vinod) died. The court found only one man, Ashokan, who has since died, responsible for constable Vinod’s death; the other 56 who were accused were held not guilty. Four leaders, including Mr. Geethanandan, were convicted on a conspiracy charge related to the assault on a surviving officer and sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment. On August 21, the Kerala High Court suspended their sentences and granted them bail pending appeal.

The Erasure of Jogi’s Death

However, this case has effectively buried the death of Jogi, an Adivasi man killed on the same morning, in what officials termed as a “death in police operation.” In the judgment’s opening statement, Jogi appears not as a victim but as one of the accused, alleged to have tortured hostages “under the direction of Geethanandan” and to have caused, with others, Vinod’s death. His death entered the file in an adversarial role, before any question of his own killing was raised.

The Historical Context

The Muthanga struggle exposed how Kerala’s much-vaunted development story ran up against a harder truth: its Adivasis had waited decades for the land the government had promised but never delivered, and when they finally asserted that right, the government moved to silence them. Twenty-three years produced a trial, 47 witnesses and a 217-page judgment for Vinod’s death. For Jogi, they produced nothing—not a charge, a witness, or a line of inquiry.

The Questions the Trial Was Asked to Settle

The questions this trial was asked to settle were drawn up in the 2004 chargesheet. It asks who conspired against Vinod, who assaulted the officers and who caused his death. It does not address Jogi’s death. This silence was fixed in place when investigators first decided what the case would and would not be about.

The Special Prosecutor’s Admission

The special prosecutor told the media that Jogi’s death fell outside what the CBI had been asked to investigate, since police were “discharging their official duties” that day. That may describe the case’s legal boundaries. But it is also an admission that those boundaries were drawn to leave Jogi out from the start. An Adivasi died in police action during an Adivasi movement, and his death was absorbed into a file built to answer for everything except that.

The Lack of Questioning

This raises a further question: who was heard in court? Of the 47 prosecution witnesses, roughly half were police, forest officials or investigators; none were Adivasis. The defence, representing the 57 accused, could produce only a single witness, whose testimony concerned the movement’s welfare work, and not the eviction itself. When defence lawyers asked a police witness whether the eviction team had set fire to huts and beaten Adivasis as they fled, the answer was a flat no. No one from the community was in court to say otherwise.

The Line the Law Drew

It would be easy to read the Muthanga incident as standard police action against protesters, but the reality is more revealing. Vinod came from a Dalit family, and so did Geethanandan. The line the law drew that day was not about community; it was about who wore a uniform and who did not. The judgment recommends compensation for Vinod’s family and the two surviving officers; it recommends nothing for Jogi’s family, because the rule being applied was never going to cover him. In the end, recognition followed the government’s chain of command—not who was harmed, and not who held the stronger claim to the land that started it all.

The Unkept Promise

To give Jogi justice, no one needs to reopen the case. The government just needs to formally ask what happened to him. Moreover, nothing in this verdict stops Jogi’s family from claiming compensation under the State’s scheme for victims of police violence. He was included in the case only to be blamed, never accounted for. Muthanga happened under a Congress-led government. Two decades on, Kerala is again governed by another Congress-led government, and it carries the responsibility its predecessor left behind. Adivasis had come to Muthanga in 2003 because of a promise the government never kept. That promise is still unkept.

Key Issues Raised

1. The Erasure of Adivasi Deaths

The core issue is the erasure of Jogi’s death. The case has effectively buried the death of Jogi, an Adivasi man killed on the same morning as constable Vinod. The judgment’s opening statement portrays Jogi not as a victim but as one of the accused. This is a grave injustice.

2. The Disparity in the Treatment of Deaths

The article highlights the disparity in the treatment of deaths. Twenty-three years produced a trial, 47 witnesses and a 217-page judgment for Vinod’s death. For Jogi, they produced nothing—not a charge, a witness, or a line of inquiry. This disparity reveals a systemic bias that privileges the lives of state actors over those of marginalized Adivasis.

3. The Lack of Adivasi Representation in Court

The article highlights the lack of Adivasi representation in court. Of the 47 prosecution witnesses, roughly half were police, forest officials or investigators; none were Adivasis. The defence could produce only a single witness. This lack of representation undermines the fairness of the trial.

4. The Line the Law Drew

The article argues that the line the law drew that day was not about community; it was about who wore a uniform and who did not. The judgment recommends compensation for Vinod’s family and the two surviving officers; it recommends nothing for Jogi’s family. This is a clear indication of the bias in the legal system.

5. The Unkept Promise of Land

The article highlights the unkept promise of land. Adivasis had come to Muthanga in 2003 because of a promise the government never kept. That promise is still unkept. This is the root cause of the Muthanga agitation.

6. The Need for Accountability

The article argues that to give Jogi justice, no one needs to reopen the case. The government just needs to formally ask what happened to him. Moreover, nothing in this verdict stops Jogi’s family from claiming compensation under the State’s scheme for victims of police violence.

Timeline of Events

• 2001: Government promises to distribute land to landless Adivasi families.

• Early January 2003: Muthanga agitation begins.

• February 19, 2003: Government evacuates protesters through police action; Jogi and Vinod die.

• 2004: Chargesheet filed.

• July 31, 2026: Principal Sessions Court in Wayanad delivers its verdict.

• August 21, 2026: Kerala High Court suspends the sentences of the four leaders and grants them bail.

Government Response

• Police Action: The government evacuated the protesters through police action.

• Prosecution: The special prosecutor told the media that Jogi’s death fell outside what the CBI had been asked to investigate.

• Compensation: The judgment recommends compensation for Vinod’s family and the two surviving officers; it recommends nothing for Jogi’s family.

• Unkept Promise: The promise to distribute land to landless Adivasi families is still unkept.

Judicial Developments

• Principal Sessions Court, Wayanad: Delivered its verdict on July 31, 2026.

• Kerala High Court: Suspended the sentences of the four leaders and granted them bail pending appeal on August 21, 2026.

Constitutional & Governance Dimensions

• Article 21 (Right to Life): The right to life includes the right to live with dignity. The killing of Jogi is a violation of this right.

• Article 14 (Equality before Law): The disparity in the treatment of deaths is a violation of the right to equality.

• Article 15 (Prohibition of Discrimination): The bias against Adivasis is a violation of the prohibition of discrimination.

• Article 46 (DPSP): Directs the state to promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.

• Fifth Schedule: Provides for the administration and control of Scheduled Areas.

• Governance: The article highlights the need for better governance of Adivasi affairs.

• Accountability: The article highlights the need for greater accountability for state violence.

Social and Political Significance

• Adivasi Rights: The Muthanga verdict is a setback for Adivasi rights.

• Land Rights: The unkept promise of land is a major source of Adivasi discontent.

• State Violence: The killing of Jogi is an example of state violence against marginalized communities.

• Justice: The verdict raises questions about the nature of justice in cases of state violence.

• Political Sensitivity: The Muthanga case is a politically sensitive issue in Kerala.

Challenges

1. Erasure of Adivasi Deaths: The erasure of Jogi’s death.

2. Disparity in Treatment: The disparity in the treatment of deaths.

3. Lack of Representation: The lack of Adivasi representation in court.

4. Bias in the Legal System: The bias in the legal system.

5. Unkept Promise: The unkept promise of land.

6. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to address Adivasi issues.

Way Forward

1. Formally Ask What Happened to Jogi: The government should formally ask what happened to Jogi.

2. Compensation: Jogi’s family should be given compensation under the State’s scheme for victims of police violence.

3. Fulfil the Promise of Land: The government should fulfil its promise to distribute land to landless Adivasi families.

4. Ensure Representation: Adivasis should be represented in all matters that affect them.

5. Address Bias: The bias in the legal system should be addressed.

6. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to address Adivasi issues.

Conclusion

The Muthanga verdict is a stark reminder of the deep-rooted inequalities and injustices that plague Indian society. The erasure of Jogi’s death, the disparity in the treatment of deaths, and the lack of Adivasi representation in court reveal a systemic bias that privileges the lives of state actors over those of marginalized Adivasis.

The way forward requires a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the structural and the institutional dimensions of the challenge. It requires formally asking what happened to Jogi, providing compensation to his family, fulfilling the promise of land, ensuring representation, addressing bias, and political will.

The time for action is now. The future of Adivasi rights and the nature of justice in India depends on the choices made today.

5 UPSC-Style Questions & Answers

Q1. “Muthanga verdict: whose death counts?” Discuss this statement in the context of the erasure of Jogi’s death.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The Muthanga verdict raises the question of whose death counts.
Key Issues:

1. Erasure of Jogi’s Death: The case has effectively buried the death of Jogi, an Adivasi man killed on the same morning as constable Vinod.

2. Disparity in Treatment: Twenty-three years produced a trial, 47 witnesses and a 217-page judgment for Vinod’s death. For Jogi, they produced nothing.

3. Adversarial Role: In the judgment’s opening statement, Jogi appears not as a victim but as one of the accused.
   The way forward requires formally asking what happened to Jogi and providing compensation to his family.

Q2. Discuss the systemic bias in the legal system as revealed by the Muthanga verdict. What are its implications for Adivasi rights?
Answer: The Muthanga verdict reveals a systemic bias in the legal system.
Key Issues:

1. Disparity in Treatment: The judgment recommends compensation for Vinod’s family and the two surviving officers; it recommends nothing for Jogi’s family.

2. Lack of Representation: Of the 47 prosecution witnesses, roughly half were police, forest officials or investigators; none were Adivasis.

3. The Line the Law Drew: The line the law drew that day was not about community; it was about who wore a uniform and who did not.
   Implications for Adivasi Rights:

4. Erosion of Trust: The verdict erodes the trust of Adivasis in the legal system.

5. Injustice: The verdict perpetuates injustice against Adivasis.
   The way forward requires addressing the bias in the legal system.

Q3. “The Muthanga struggle exposed how Kerala’s much-vaunted development story ran up against a harder truth.” Critically examine this statement.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The Muthanga struggle exposed how Kerala’s much-vaunted development story ran up against a harder truth.
Key Issues:

1. Unkept Promise: Its Adivasis had waited decades for the land the government had promised but never delivered.

2. State Violence: When they finally asserted that right, the government moved to silence them.

3. Development Story: The Muthanga struggle exposed the gap between Kerala’s development story and the reality of Adivasi life.
   The way forward requires fulfilling the promise of land.

Q4. What are the key challenges in ensuring justice for victims of state violence in India? Suggest measures to address these challenges.
Answer: The key challenges in ensuring justice for victims of state violence in India are:

1. Erasure of Victims: The erasure of victims like Jogi.

2. Disparity in Treatment: The disparity in the treatment of deaths.

3. Lack of Representation: The lack of representation of marginalized communities in court.

4. Bias in the Legal System: The bias in the legal system.

5. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to address state violence.
   Measures to address these challenges:

6. Formally Ask What Happened: The government should formally ask what happened to victims like Jogi.

7. Compensation: Compensation should be provided to the families of victims.

8. Ensure Representation: Marginalized communities should be represented in all matters that affect them.

9. Address Bias: The bias in the legal system should be addressed.

10. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will.

Q5. “The time for action is now.” In light of this statement, suggest a comprehensive strategy for India to ensure justice for Adivasis and other marginalized communities.
Answer: A comprehensive strategy for India to ensure justice for Adivasis and other marginalized communities must include:

1. Fulfil Promises: The government should fulfil its promises to Adivasis and other marginalized communities.

2. Ensure Representation: Marginalized communities should be represented in all matters that affect them.

3. Address Bias: The bias in the legal system should be addressed.

4. Provide Compensation: Compensation should be provided to the families of victims of state violence.

5. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to ensure justice for all.
   The time for action is now. The future of Adivasi rights and the nature of justice in India depends on the choices made today.

Sulphur Price Surge, Geopolitical Shocks, Supply Chain Vulnerabilities, and the Green Energy Transition

Why in News?

The international price of sulphur has risen nearly four-fold in one year—from $280 per tonne in July 2025 to $1,050 in July 2026—adding to India’s import burden. The prices started climbing from late 2025 onwards, driven by rising demand and the Russia-Ukraine war. While prices climbed steadily, crossing $500 per tonne by December 2025, it has skyrocketed since March 2026 after the U.S. and Israel launched attacks on Iran. This dramatic surge in a critical industrial commodity has significant implications for India’s economy, particularly for its fertilizer and metals processing industries, and its broader ambitions in the electric vehicle (EV) battery supply chain. A data-driven analysis by Devyanshi Bihani reveals the extent of the price shock and the structural vulnerabilities it exposes.

Introduction

Sulphur, often described as the world’s most important industrial commodity that few people think about, is a critical input for a wide range of industries, from fertilizers to metals processing to battery manufacturing. Its price is a barometer of geopolitical stability and global supply chain health. The recent four-fold increase in sulphur prices is not merely a market fluctuation; it is a symptom of a world in flux, where geopolitical conflicts and the transition to green energy are reshaping the demand and supply dynamics of critical raw materials.

The article by Devyanshi Bihani provides a comprehensive analysis of the sulphur price surge, its causes, and its implications for India. It argues that India’s import dependence, particularly on West Asia and Russia, makes it vulnerable to supply disruptions and price shocks. This article analyses the key issues raised, the constitutional and governance dimensions, and the way forward for India to secure its sulphur supply and build a resilient industrial ecosystem.

Background

The Sulphur Price Surge

The international price of sulphur has risen nearly four-fold in one year, from $280 per tonne in July 2025 to $1,050 in July 2026. The prices started climbing from late 2025 onwards, driven by rising demand and the Russia-Ukraine war. While the prices climbed steadily, crossing $500 per tonne by December 2025, it has skyrocketed since March 2026 after the U.S. and Israel launched attacks on Iran.

Sulphur supply is strongly tied to oil and gas production, as about 92% of global sulphur production comes from petroleum refining and natural gas processing. Only 8% is mined directly from natural deposits or sulphur-rich minerals such as pyrites.

The Reasons for the Price Surge

The article identifies several reasons for the price surge:

1. Supply Disruptions: Russia, the third largest producer, faced Ukrainian drone strikes targeting oil and gas processing plants. This led to Russia restricting the export of industrial sulphur to maintain domestic supplies. The restriction announced till December 2025, has since been extended till December 31, 2026.

2. Chinese Export Restrictions: China also restricted sulphuric acid exports in 2026 to meet domestic needs, further tightening the global market.

3. West Asia Conflict: West Asia accounts for roughly 90% of India’s sulphur imports, but also for more than 45% of global seaborne sulphur trade. The U.S. and Israel’s attacks on Iran have disrupted this supply.

4. Rising Demand: The global market had moved into a structural deficit by 2024. It is estimated the demand to be 72.8 MMT in 2025, against a supply of 70.8 MMT – a deficit of about 1.9 MT.

5. Metals Processing and EV Batteries: A major reason for the increasing demand is because of metals processing, linked to production of batteries. Sulphuric acid is used in High-Pressure Acid Leach (HPAL) plants to extract nickel from laterite ores.

India’s Import Dependence

India is the eighth biggest producer of sulphur, with 3.7 MMT. However, it relies on imports to meet its demand. India’s imports have grown over the years, with West Asian producers contributing to about 90% of its total imports. In 2025, India imported 2.25 MMT of sulphur, of which 2.02 MMT came from West Asia. Russia accounted for 0.15 MMT (6.5%). A majority of India’s demand is from the fertilizer industry, with the Fertiliser Association of India estimating that 52% of the sulphur required for the industry came through imports in 2024-25. The first major supply shock came from Russia, the third largest producer, with Ukrainian drone strikes targeting oil and gas processing plants.

Key Issues Raised

1. The Geopolitical Vulnerability of Sulphur Supply

The article highlights the geopolitical vulnerability of sulphur supply. The Russia-Ukraine war and the West Asia conflict have disrupted supply chains, leading to a sharp increase in prices. India’s heavy dependence on West Asia (90% of imports) makes it particularly vulnerable to regional instability.

2. The Structural Deficit in the Global Sulphur Market

The article notes that the global market had moved into a structural deficit by 2024. The demand for sulphur is rising, driven by the fertilizer industry and the metals processing sector, while supply is constrained by geopolitical factors and export restrictions.

3. The Link Between Sulphur and the Green Energy Transition

The article highlights the link between sulphur and the green energy transition. Sulphuric acid is used in High-Pressure Acid Leach (HPAL) plants to extract nickel from laterite ores, which is then used in products including EV batteries. The rising demand for EV batteries is a key driver of the increasing demand for sulphur.

4. India’s Import Burden

The article notes that the sharp increase in prices has led to India’s import cost of sulphur going up 2.5 times from $248 million in 2024 to $638 million in 2025. This puts pressure on the current account deficit and the rupee.

5. The Impact on the Fertilizer Industry

The article highlights the impact on the fertilizer industry. A majority of India’s demand is from the fertilizer industry. The rise in sulphur prices could lead to higher fertilizer prices, impacting farmers and food security.

6. The Need for Diversification

The article argues that India needs to diversify its sources of sulphur imports to reduce its dependence on West Asia and Russia. It also needs to explore domestic sources of sulphur and promote the recovery of sulphur from industrial processes.

Timeline of Events

• July 2025: International price of sulphur at $280 per tonne.

• Late 2025: Prices start climbing due to rising demand and the Russia-Ukraine war.

• December 2025: Prices cross $500 per tonne.

• March 2026: U.S. and Israel launch attacks on Iran; prices skyrocket.

• July 2026: International price of sulphur at $1,050 per tonne.

• 2024: Global market moves into a structural deficit.

• 2025: India imports 2.25 MMT of sulphur, of which 2.02 MMT came from West Asia.

• December 31, 2026: Russia’s export restriction on industrial sulphur extended till this date.

Government Response

The provided article does not detail specific government responses to the sulphur price surge. However, it implies that the government needs to take measures to secure India’s sulphur supply and mitigate the impact of price shocks on the fertilizer and metals processing industries.

Judicial Developments

The provided article does not mention any specific judicial developments related to the sulphur price surge.

Constitutional & Governance Dimensions

• Article 21 (Right to Life): The right to life includes the right to food. The rise in sulphur prices could lead to higher fertilizer prices, impacting food security.

• Article 39(b) and (c) (DPSP): Direct the state to ensure that the ownership and control of material resources are distributed to serve the common good.

• Governance: The article highlights the need for better governance of critical raw material supply chains.

• Trade Policy: The government needs to negotiate trade agreements to secure access to sulphur.

• Industrial Policy: The government needs to promote domestic production and recovery of sulphur.

Social and Political Significance

• Food Security: The rise in sulphur prices could lead to higher fertilizer prices, impacting food security.

• Farmer Distress: Higher fertilizer prices could lead to farmer distress.

• Industrial Growth: The rise in sulphur prices could impact the growth of the metals processing and battery manufacturing industries.

• Green Energy Transition: The rise in sulphur prices could slow down the green energy transition.

• Political Sensitivity: Fertilizer prices are politically sensitive in India.

Challenges

1. Geopolitical Vulnerability: India’s heavy dependence on West Asia for sulphur imports.

2. Structural Deficit: The global market has moved into a structural deficit.

3. Rising Demand: The rising demand for sulphur from the fertilizer and metals processing industries.

4. Export Restrictions: Export restrictions by Russia and China.

5. Lack of Domestic Sources: India has limited domestic sources of sulphur.

6. Lack of Political Will: The lack of sustained political will to address the issue.

Way Forward

1. Diversify Imports: India should diversify its sources of sulphur imports to reduce its dependence on West Asia and Russia.

2. Explore Domestic Sources: India should explore domestic sources of sulphur and promote the recovery of sulphur from industrial processes.

3. Strategic Reserves: India should maintain strategic reserves of sulphur.

4. Promote Recycling: India should promote the recycling of sulphur from industrial processes.

5. Invest in R&D: India should invest in R&D to develop alternative technologies that reduce the demand for sulphur.

6. International Cooperation: India should work with other countries to ensure the stable supply of sulphur.

7. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to address the issue.

Conclusion

The article by Devyanshi Bihani is a timely and powerful analysis of the sulphur price surge and its implications for India. The four-fold increase in prices is not merely a market fluctuation; it is a symptom of a world in flux, where geopolitical conflicts and the transition to green energy are reshaping the demand and supply dynamics of critical raw materials.

The way forward requires a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the structural and the policy dimensions of the challenge. It requires diversifying imports, exploring domestic sources, maintaining strategic reserves, promoting recycling, investing in R&D, international cooperation, and political will.

The time for action is now. The future of India’s food security, industrial growth, and green energy transition depends on the choices made today.

5 UPSC-Style Questions & Answers

Q1. “Sulphur prices rise due to Russia-Ukraine, West Asia wars.” Discuss the key reasons for the surge in international sulphur prices.
Answer: The statement is accurate. Sulphur prices have risen due to the Russia-Ukraine and West Asia wars.
Key Reasons:

1. Supply Disruptions: Russia, the third largest producer, restricted the export of industrial sulphur.

2. Chinese Export Restrictions: China restricted sulphuric acid exports in 2026.

3. West Asia Conflict: West Asia accounts for roughly 90% of India’s sulphur imports.

4. Rising Demand: The global market had moved into a structural deficit by 2024.

5. Metals Processing and EV Batteries: Sulphuric acid is used in HPAL plants to extract nickel from laterite ores.
   The way forward requires diversifying imports and exploring domestic sources.

Q2. Discuss India’s import dependence on sulphur. What are the implications for the fertilizer industry and food security?
Answer: India is the eighth biggest producer of sulphur, with 3.7 MMT. However, it relies on imports to meet its demand.
Import Dependence:

1. West Asia: West Asian producers contribute to about 90% of India’s total imports.

2. Russia: Russia accounted for 0.15 MMT (6.5%) of India’s imports in 2025.

3. Import Cost: India’s import cost of sulphur went up 2.5 times from $248 million in 2024 to $638 million in 2025.
   Implications for the Fertilizer Industry and Food Security:

4. Higher Fertilizer Prices: A majority of India’s demand is from the fertilizer industry. The rise in sulphur prices could lead to higher fertilizer prices.

5. Food Security: Higher fertilizer prices could impact food security.
   The way forward requires diversifying imports and exploring domestic sources.

Q3. “The link between sulphur and the green energy transition is a critical issue.” Critically examine this statement.
Answer: The statement is accurate. The link between sulphur and the green energy transition is a critical issue.
Key Issues:

1. EV Batteries: Sulphuric acid is used in High-Pressure Acid Leach (HPAL) plants to extract nickel from laterite ores, which is then used in products including EV batteries.

2. Rising Demand: The rising demand for EV batteries is a key driver of the increasing demand for sulphur.

3. Green Energy Transition: The rise in sulphur prices could slow down the green energy transition.
   The way forward requires investing in R&D to develop alternative technologies.

Q4. What are the key challenges in securing India’s sulphur supply? Suggest measures to address these challenges.
Answer: The key challenges in securing India’s sulphur supply are:

1. Geopolitical Vulnerability: India’s heavy dependence on West Asia for sulphur imports.

2. Structural Deficit: The global market has moved into a structural deficit.

3. Rising Demand: The rising demand for sulphur from the fertilizer and metals processing industries.

4. Export Restrictions: Export restrictions by Russia and China.

5. Lack of Domestic Sources: India has limited domestic sources of sulphur.
   Measures to address these challenges:

6. Diversify Imports: India should diversify its sources of sulphur imports.

7. Explore Domestic Sources: India should explore domestic sources of sulphur.

8. Strategic Reserves: India should maintain strategic reserves of sulphur.

9. Promote Recycling: India should promote the recycling of sulphur.

10. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will.

Q5. “The time for action is now.” In light of this statement, suggest a comprehensive strategy for India to secure its supply of critical raw materials like sulphur.
Answer: A comprehensive strategy for India to secure its supply of critical raw materials like sulphur must include:

1. Diversify Imports: India should diversify its sources of sulphur imports to reduce its dependence on West Asia and Russia.

2. Explore Domestic Sources: India should explore domestic sources of sulphur and promote the recovery of sulphur from industrial processes.

3. Strategic Reserves: India should maintain strategic reserves of sulphur.

4. Promote Recycling: India should promote the recycling of sulphur from industrial processes.

5. Invest in R&D: India should invest in R&D to develop alternative technologies that reduce the demand for sulphur.

6. International Cooperation: India should work with other countries to ensure the stable supply of sulphur.

7. Political Will: The most crucial element is sustained political will to address the issue.
   The time for action is now. The future of India’s food security, industrial growth, and green energy transition depends on the choices made today.