What to Read in Indian Express Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

EDITORIAL 1: ICJ’s climate ruling

Context

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered a landmark ruling on Wednesday that can breathe new life into the climate movement, and potentially open the floodgates for litigation seeking greater accountability from countries on climate action.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ)

• The Hague-based court, which is the main judicial branch of the United Nations, has held that countries are under a legal obligation to take steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and could be held liable to pay compensation if they failed to do so.
• By making it clear that climate action is not just a policy imperative for countries but a legally-binding commitment under international law, the ruling strengthens the position of developing countries and everyone else advocating enhanced climate action from the rich and industrialised world.
• The UNGA wanted the ICJ to address two very specific questions: (i)what are the obligations of countries under international law to protect the climate system and, (ii) what are the legal consequences for countries that do not fulfil their obligations.

Ruling of the court

• The court examined the provisions of the three climate treaties — the 1994 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, and the 2015 Paris Agreement — and several other environment-related international laws that have a bearing on the climate system.
• These include the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the 1987 Montreal Protocol for protecting ozone, the 1992 Convention on Biodiversity and the 1994 Convention to Combat Desertification.
• The court concluded that climate action was not a matter of choice or preference, but a legal obligation: countries were obligated to take measures that contributed to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
• In addition, rich and industrialised countries in Annexure I of the UNFCCC had an obligation to take the lead on emissions reduction, and facilitate technology and financial transfers to developing countries.
• Countries could be held liable even for the irresponsible actions of private businesses or corporations,if they had failed to exercise due diligence and not taken adequate regulatory or legislative measures to prevent the irresponsible behaviour of private actors, the court held.

Significance of ruling

• The advisory opinion of the ICJ is not international law, and it is not binding on countries.
• However, it is the most authoritative interpretation of international law on the subject,and it is likely to be relied upon by courts around the world in deciding matters that come before them.
• In recent years, progress on the global fight against climate change has been severely undermined by the lack of adequate action by countries, particularly those in the developed world. The emissions reduction targets for 2030 will almost certainly be missed.
• The credibility of international climate negotiations is at stake, with developing countries, particularly the most vulnerable ones, very upset over their concerns being ignored.
• This is important because the climate actions mandated under the UNFCCC or the Paris Agreement are, barring a few, largely suggestive in nature,and there are no consequences for countries for non-compliance.
• For example, the US suffered no consequences for pulling out of the Paris Agreement,and the developed countries as a whole got away with not meeting their finance obligations.
• Most developed countries did not meet their emissions reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol either, and some of them walked out of the treaty — again without any consequences.
• With this, the ICJ has strongly endorsed the concept of loss and damage in climate laws, which call upon developed countries to take the lead in raising financial and other support to help countries recover from impacts of climate change.

Way forward

• The actual impact of the ruling will become evident only when it begins to be cited as precedent in individual cases on climate-related disputes, and from the treatment that it receives from governments.

 

EDITORIAL 2: Closing the deal

Context

INDIA HAS secured market access for key job-creating sectors such as textiles, footwear, gems and jewellery, and marine products — where the UK is set to eliminate duties of up to 20 per cent.

Tariffs now low

• Negotiators have also managed to push for eliminating duties for almost 99.7% of tariff lines in India’s food sector.
• In most food items, the tariffs were as high as 70 per cent. New Delhi extracted enhanced market access in export-oriented sectors such as marine and animal products, including seafood, dairy, and meat products, with tariffs reduced to zero from up to 20 per cent.
• On its part, New Delhi has allowed British companies to participate in a class of public procurement tenders, and also opened the highly-tariffed automobile and alcoholic beverage industries.

For the first time

• For the first time, India has allowed duty cuts for UK-origin alcohol including whisky, brandy, rum, vodka, liqueurs, mead, cider, and tequila.
• These products, which currently face a base customs duty of 150 per cent,will see steep reductions — but only if they meet a Minimum Import Price (MIP) threshold of $5 per litre or $6 per 750 ml bottle.
• For qualifying imports, the duty will  be gradually lowered from 110 per cent in Year 1 to 75 per cent by Year 10, through equal annual reductions.
• This design helps shield India’s domestic liquor market from low-cost imports while giving premium UK spirits.
• Also, in a first, India has allowed UK firms to participate in government tenders, offering them Class Two statusunder ‘Make in India’ rules, which require 20-50 per cent domestic value addition.
• While India had previously opened public procurement under the UAE deal, experts said the deal offered to the UK is the most generous yet.

India-UK Social Security Boost

• This is the most extensive concession in government procurement that India has offered in any FTA to date and marks a strategic shift away from using public procurement as a tool for domestic industrial development.
• The 20 per cent local content rule allows UK firms to use up to 80 per cent inputsfrom third countries — such as China or the EU — while still receiving preferential treatment, effectively diluting the benefits that programmes like Make in India and Atmanirbhar Bharat were designed to protect.
• The access granted to the UK could also set a precedent for future FTAs with larger economies like the EU or the US, potentially eroding India’s ability to use public procurement as a lever for policy goals such as import substitution, domestic capacity-building, and employment generation.
• Experts said that India seems to have conceded significantly on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), as UK patent holders are now allowed to give voluntary licences, representing a marked shift from the earlier stance.
• The IP chapter undermines policy space to facilitate access to medicines on two grounds. One, it explicitly mentions a preference for voluntary licensing over compulsory licensing.
• Two, it reiterates the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) provisionwhich allows the patent holder to withhold information on the working of patents for three years.

Shedding protectionism

• The UK deal is significant as it marks the beginning of integration between the advanced services sector in the UK and that of India.
• India has finally opened its doors to high-end British cars and whisky, albeit in a phased manner.
• The India–UK Free Trade Agreement ensures comprehensive market access for goods across all sectors, covering all of India’s export interests.
• India will benefit from tariff elimination on approximately 99 per cent of tariff lines, covering nearly 100 per cent of trade value — offering opportunities to boost bilateral trade between India and the UK.
• he two countries have also concluded negotiations on the Double Contribution Convention Agreement, or social security pact, which would help avoid double contributions to social security funds by Indian professionals working for a limited period in Britain. However, talks on the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) are still ongoing.

Conclusion

The India–UK FTA boosts exports and services, opens new markets, and marks a shift from protectionism, setting the tone for future global trade deals.