What to Read in The Hindu Editorial ( Topic and Syllabus wise)

 

Article 1: Another barrier

Why in news: Mandatory menstrual leave may unintentionally reinforce gender stereotypes and make employers perceive women as less reliable workers. This could discourage hiring or promotions, ultimately reducing women’s workplace opportunities despite the policy’s intention to support health.

Key Details

Menstrual leave debate emerged after the Supreme Court of India declined to mandate a national law on menstrual leave.

The Court, led by Surya Kant, warned that mandatory leave could affect women’s hiring, promotions and responsibilities.

Some States already provide menstrual leave, such as Odisha, Kerala and Karnataka with limited provisions.

Many women suffer from health issues like Endometriosis and Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, which justify workplace support.

Female Labour Force Participation Rate in India rose from 23.3% (2017-18) to 41.7% (2023-24), making policies affecting women’s work participation especially significant.

Menstrual Leave Debate in India: Balancing Health Needs and Workplace Equality

Background of the Issue

On 13 March, a Bench of the Supreme Court of India headed by Surya Kant refused to entertain a petition seeking a law mandating menstrual leave for women workers and students.

The Court warned that mandatory menstrual leave could unintentionally harm women’s career prospects.

It suggested that States should adopt voluntary policies instead of a uniform compulsory law.

Existing State-Level Initiatives

Odisha: Women government employees up to 55 years can take one additional menstrual leave day per month.

Kerala: Menstrual leave is available for female trainees in ITIs and universities.

Karnataka: Government order allows one day of menstrual leave per month for women up to 52 years in both public and private sectors.

The Karnataka order has been challenged in the High Court, with concerns that private firms may avoid hiring women.

Health Concerns Faced by Women

Many women experience severe menstrual pain and medical conditions such as:

Endometriosis

Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Polycystic Ovary Disease

These conditions can reduce productivity and cause serious discomfort, creating a genuine need for workplace support.

Concerns with Mandatory Menstrual Leave

Risk of workplace discrimination: Employers may hesitate to hire or promote women.

Biological determinism: Policies may reinforce stereotypes that women are less capable of handling demanding roles.

Career impact: Women may be denied leadership positions or important responsibilities.

Global Experience

Spain introduced menstrual leave in 2023, widely praised as a feminist reform.

However, very few women used the leave, indicating possible social stigma or workplace pressure.

Zambia has a menstrual leave policy but reports instances of misuse.

Indian Labour Market Context

India’s Female Labour Force Participation Rate (FLFPR) increased from 23.3% (2017–18) to 41.7% (2023–24).

Much of this increase is due to rural women entering work out of economic distress.

In informal employment, enforcing menstrual leave could be difficult or impractical.

Suggested Way Forward

Consultative policy-making involving employers, workers and health experts.

Voluntary menstrual leave policies rather than mandatory provisions.

Provision of free sanitary products and medicines at workplaces.

Flexible use of existing leave provisions for health-related needs.

Conclusion

A balanced menstrual leave policy should recognise women’s health needs without unintentionally limiting their employment opportunities. Instead of mandatory provisions, flexible leave options, workplace support, and access to sanitary products and medicines can better address menstrual health concerns. Policies developed through consultation with stakeholders can protect women’s well-being while ensuring greater participation, equality, and fairness in the workforce.

Descriptive question:

1. “Menstrual leave policies aim to support women’s health, but they may also reinforce workplace inequalities.” Discuss. (10 marks, 150 words)

 

Article 2: Building India’s climate resilience with water at the core

Why in news: COP-30 emphasised water-centred adaptation because climate change impacts are most visible through water systems like floods, droughts, and erratic monsoons, making water security central to resilience, food security, and survival.

Key Details

COP-30 (Belém, 2025) focused on implementation and measurable climate adaptation.

Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) were integrated into global climate accountability indicators.

59 Belém Adaptation Indicators guide climate-resilient water systems and disaster preparedness.

Emphasis on early warning systems, hydrometeorological services, and vulnerability assessments.

Countries like India must align water governance, finance, and digital systems with climate adaptation goals.

COP-30 as the “COP of Implementation”

COP-30, held in Belém, Brazil (November 2025), emphasised moving from climate promises to practical and measurable implementation.

Climate adaptation is now viewed as a system that must function under climate stress, not merely an abstract idea of resilience.

The conference highlighted the need for accountability and measurable outcomes in adaptation policies.

Water emerged as a central pillar of climate survival, shifting from a peripheral infrastructure issue to a core adaptation priority.

For the first time, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) indicators were integrated into global climate accountability frameworks, reshaping the water–food–climate nexus for countries like India.

Climate Change Experienced Through Water

Climate change impacts are most directly felt through water systems such as floods, droughts, and erratic rainfall.

Flooding submerges cities while droughts weaken rural economies and agriculture.

Glacial melting in the Himalayas threatens the stability of major river systems.

Saline intrusion contaminates coastal aquifers, affecting drinking water and agriculture.

Irregular monsoons disrupt food production and water availability.

Agriculture contributes around 40% of human-induced methane emissions, especially from rice cultivation, livestock, and organic waste.

Therefore, water-use efficiency, wastewater recycling, aquifer recharge, and resilient sanitation systems are becoming key climate mitigation and adaptation strategies.

Belém Adaptation Indicators and Global Governance

The 59 Belém Adaptation Indicators, under the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience, create a structured system to monitor climate adaptation progress.

One major focus is climate-resilient water and sanitation systems.

This includes reducing water scarcity, improving resilience to floods and droughts, ensuring universal safe drinking water, and strengthening sanitation infrastructure.

Another focus area is risk governance and disaster preparedness.

Countries are expected to implement multi-hazard early warning systems by 2027, improve hydrometeorological services, and conduct updated national vulnerability assessments by 2030.

Water security is no longer about building infrastructure alone but about ensuring systems continue functioning during climate shocks.

India’s Existing Foundations for Water Governance

India has already initiated institutional reforms to strengthen water governance.

The creation of the Ministry of Jal Shakti in 2019 integrated water management under a single administrative framework.

Water Vision 2047 aligns with global adaptation goals by emphasising sustainability, equity, and resilience in water management.

Groundwater governance has improved through the National Aquifer Mapping and Management Programme (NAQUIM 2.0).

The programme now focuses on aquifer-level management plans, linking scientific hydrogeological data with policy decisions.

River rejuvenation initiatives, particularly the National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG), now integrate biodiversity conservation, digital monitoring, and international collaboration.

These efforts transform rivers into ecological buffers against climate variability.

Key Challenges and the Path Forward for India

Despite progress, three major systemic risks remain.

Water scarcity is severe and uneven across regions, and most climate disasters in India are water-related.

Water systems must undergo climate stress testing, diversify supply sources, and ensure redundancy in service delivery during floods or droughts.

Adaptation finance remains uncertain, despite global discussions about mobilising $1.3 trillion annually by 2035.

Water projects should be recognised as climate investments rather than routine sectoral spending.

Digital fragmentation limits the use of India’s vast hydrological and meteorological data for real-time planning.

Integrating Artificial Intelligence with climate data, crop advisories, insurance systems, and financial flowscould significantly improve decision-making.

India already has several programmes on drinking water, sanitation, irrigation efficiency, urban water management, and climate action, but these must be aligned with climate stress indicators and unified dashboards.

Belém Indicators and the Future of Climate Adaptation

The Belém Adaptation Indicators act as a global dashboard for climate survival rather than a bureaucratic checklist.

Effective implementation can transform climate adaptation into the central organising principle of development planning.

India’s digital public infrastructure, water reforms, and community-based initiatives provide a strong foundation.

With proper convergence of policies, data systems, and finance, India can emerge as a leader in operationalising climate adaptation.

Ultimately, resilience should be measured not by infrastructure created, but by systems that continue serving people during floods, droughts, and other climate shocks.

Conclusion

COP-30 marks a shift from promises to measurable climate adaptation, placing water at the centre of climate resilience. By integrating WASH indicators, early warning systems, and governance reforms, it promotes system-based adaptation. For India, aligning existing water missions, digital infrastructure, and finance with these indicators can strengthen resilience and position the country as a leader in climate adaptation across the Global South.

 

Article 3: House decorum

Why in news: The controversy arose because Opposition parties accused the Speaker of bias and restricting debate, while the government defended parliamentary productivity, exposing deep political polarisation and weakening trust in legislative institutions.

Key Details

Lok Sabha rejected resolution seeking removal of Speaker Om Birla.

Debate highlighted growing government–Opposition confrontation in Parliament.

Opposition alleged restrictions on debate and muted microphones.

Government cited statistics showing adequate Opposition participation.

Issue reflects declining parliamentary consensus and rising partisanship.

Lok Sabha Rejects Removal Resolution

The Lok Sabha rejected a resolution under Article 94(c) seeking the removal of Speaker Om Birla through a voice vote on March 11.

The debate preceding the vote was highly confrontational, exposing tensions between the government and the Opposition.

The resolution stemmed from concerns about the Speaker’s neutrality and conduct in the House.

The Opposition was particularly provoked by the Speaker’s claim of confidential information regarding possible protest by Congress women MPs against the Prime Minister.

The episode highlighted deep political divisions within Parliament.

Role of Parliament in Representative Democracy

Parliament forms the foundation of representative democracy, ensuring government accountability.

Regular parliamentary functioning allows scrutiny of executive actions.

It serves as a structured forum for debate between the government and Opposition.

Parliamentary procedures are meant to operate methodically and impartially.

However, increasing partisanship has weakened these democratic functions.

Impact of Single-Party Dominance

Single-party dominance has gradually eroded many formal and informal legislative norms.

Parliamentary debates increasingly reflect political confrontation rather than deliberation.

Legislative institutions are sometimes used as platforms for partisan politics.

The authority of presiding officers has also become politically contested.

This trend is visible in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.

Concerns Raised by the Opposition

Opposition MPs claim they are frequently denied opportunities to raise important issues.

Rahul Gandhi was reportedly prevented from quoting former Army Chief M.M. Naravane’s unpublished memoir on the 2020 India–China standoff.

Opposition microphones are often switched off during debates, according to their allegations.

During the Motion of Thanks debate, Rahul Gandhi was interrupted multiple times.

The Opposition also alleged restrictions on discussing issues such as the Gautam Adani investigation and international trade matters.

Government’s Defence of Parliamentary Functioning

The government cited data showing significant participation by Opposition members.

Opposition MPs reportedly received 56% of Zero Hour speaking time.

They also asked more supplementary questions (364) compared to NDA MPs (321) during the Speaker’s tenure.

Home Minister Amit Shah highlighted the high productivity of the House under the current Speaker.

He also noted that debates were conducted in 14 regional languages, reflecting parliamentary inclusivity.

Conclusion

The controversy over the Speaker’s removal resolution reflects deep political polarisation within Parliament. While the government emphasises productivity and procedural fairness, the Opposition raises concerns about shrinking democratic space for debate. Restoring Parliament’s credibility requires neutral presiding officers, respectful dialogue, and adherence to parliamentary norms, ensuring that the legislature remains an effective forum for accountability and democratic deliberation.

Descriptive question:

1. “The functioning of Parliament reflects the health of a democracy.” In light of recent controversies regarding the role of the Lok Sabha Speaker and government–Opposition relations, critically examine the challenges to parliamentary functioning in India and suggest measures to restore its effectiveness.