Author name: user

We define corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Corruption erodes trust, weakens democracy, hampers economic development and further exacerbates inequality, poverty, social division and the environmental crisis. Exposing corruption and holding the corrupt to account can only happen if we understand the way corruption works and the systems that enable it. Corruption can take many forms, and can include behaviours like: Corruption can happen anywhere: In business, government, the courts, the media, and in civil society, as well as across all sectors from health and education to infrastructure and sports. Corruption can involve anyone: Politicians, government officials, public servants, business people or members of the public. Corruption happens in the shadows: Often with the help of professional enablers such as bankers, lawyers, accountants and real estate agents, opaque financial systems and anonymous shell companies that allow corruption schemes to flourish and the corrupt to launder and hide their illicit wealth. Corruption adapts : To different contexts and changing circumstances. It can evolve in response to changes in rules, legislation and even technology. Corruption Law in India The primary anti-corruption statute in India, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PCA’) criminalises receipt of any ‘undue advantage’ by ‘public servants’ and the provision of such undue advantage by other persons. Section 171E. Punishment for bribery. Previous Next. Whoever commits the offence of bribery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both: Provided that bribery by treating shall be punished with fine only. Impact of corruption on specific human rights As the SDG 16 website indicates, corruption related crimes cost developing countries about $1.26 trillion annually. This waste and diversion of public funds leaves governments with fewer resources to fulfil their human rights obligations, to deliver services and to improve the standard of living of their citizens. The following discusses some of the ways in which corruption enables the violation of specific human rights. While the discussion revolves around the violation of individual (first and second generation) rights addressed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), in some cases such violations also impede the attainment of collective rights (third-generation). For example, when corruption violates economic and social rights, such as the right to an adequate standard of living (ICESCR art. 11), this could also hamper the attainment of the collective right to development. Another example is when corruption leads to pollution (see the Module’s discussion on the right to health), and thus violates the collective right to a clean environment. The discussion below provides several examples of ways in which corruption relates to the violation of specific human rights. The first examples relate to civil and political rights, while the subsequent ones relate to economic, social and cultural rights.The impact of corruption is often considered to be especially pronounced regarding economic, social and cultural rights, although this is not, in fact, always the case. Economic, social and cultural rights are typically perceived as requiring a greater investment of public resources compared to civil and political rights, which are typically perceived as merely requiring States to refrain from interfering with individual freedoms. However, the realization of all categories of human rights may, in fact, require the allocation of substantial public resources. In recognition of the fact that States with resource constraints may need more time to realize economic, social and cultural rights, the ICESCR allows for a “progressive realization” of economic, social and cultural rights. This means that while States are required to take immediate measures to realize these rights, they may do so to the extent possible in light of available resources. As explained in the relevant OHCHR fact sheet:[A] lack of resources cannot justify inaction or indefinite postponement of measures to implement these rights. States must demonstrate that they are making every effort to improve the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, even when resources are scarce. For example, irrespective of the resources available to it, a State should, as a matter of priority, seek to ensure that everyone has access to, at the very least, minimum levels of rights, and target programmes to protect the poor, the marginalized and the disadvantaged.At the same time, the realization of civil and political rights can also require considerable resources. For example, large amounts of funds are needed to maintain the judicial, law enforcement and prison systems and to ensure free and fair elections. The realization of civil and political rights can, therefore, also suffer greatly as a result of the misuse or misallocation of public funds. In addition, as the following discussion illustrates, there are other ways in which civil and political rights can be adversely affected by corruption. Rights to equality and non-discrimination (civil and political rights) The right to equality is referred to in all major human rights treaties (see e.g. ICCPR art. Every individual has the right to be treated equally and without discrimination by the State. The Human Rights Committee, which monitors the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, defines the term discrimination as: Any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference which is based on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, and which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by all persons, on an equal footing, of all rights and freedoms. According to this definition, corrupt acts are discriminatory in certain situations because they intrinsically distinguish, exclude, restrict or prefer; and  have the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the equal recognition, enjoyment or exercise of human rights. The right to be treated equally is violated, for example, when someone is requested to pay a bribe to obtain a public service. In this situation, those who were not asked for a bribe received better treatment, and the right to equality of the person who

The rule of law means that all laws apply equally to all citizens of the country and no one is above the law. Every citizen of the country has a right to approach the courts in case laws are violated. Similarly, every citizen can also be punished for violating laws.The Preamble of the Constitution itself prescribes the ideas of Justice, Liberty and Equality. These concepts are further enunciated in Part III of the Constitution and are made enforceable. All three branches of the government are subordinate i.e. the Judiciary, Legislature and the Executive are not only subordinate to the Constitution but are bound to act according to the provisions of the Constitution. The doctrine of judicial review is embodied in the Constitution and the subjects can approach the High Court and the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights. If the Executive or the government abuses the power vested in it or if the action is mala fide, the same can be quashed by the ordinary courts of law.The Supreme Court of India in Chief Settlement Commissioner Punjab v. Om Prakash observed that in our constitutional system, the central and most characteristic feature is the concept of the rule of law which means, in the present context, the authority of the law courts to test all administrative action by the standard of legality. The Court added that the doctrine of rule of law rejects the conception of the dual state in which government action is paced in a privileged position of immunity from control by law. Examples of how ‘rule of law’ is used. The concept of the rule of law is invoked in a manifold set of circumstances which can be distinguished according to a horizontal and vertical dimension. On one hand, the rule of law assumes a central relevance in the context of disputes which involve disturbances of the equilibrium between the powers of different legal institutions. In this sense, it constitutes a violation of the principles enshrined by the concept of rule of law the passing of a piece of legislation which undermines the independence of the judiciary, excludes some administrative powers from the scrutiny of the latter. The rule of law has both horizontal and vertical dimensions. On the other hand, in a vertical dimension, the rule of law is often referred to with respect to the legal constraints which inform the relations between legal subjects and the State. In this sense, the act of public officers which affects individuals fall outside of limits set by the rule of law any time that they illegitimately exceed the powers which are established in a foreseeable and contestable manner by positive law; or whereas an individual or a specific group is targeted by measures which violate the principle of legal equality before the law; or when those who are affected by legal power are not given the opportunity to challenge it through an effective legal remedy before a court of law. In this respect, the European Court of Human Rights has underlined that “one can scarcely conceive of the rule of law without there being a possibility of having access to the courts” The meaning of ‘rule of law’ in terms of MoE, affordance and LPbD. Mode of Existence: The contrast between the ideal of a “government of laws” and the “government of men” traces its roots to the origins of Western political-legal philosophy. The elaboration of the doctrine of the rule of law, however, represents the response to a set of challenges which have surfaced only with the transition from the Medieval order to the rise of the modern State the development of the modern concept of positive law. While the former was characterized by the coexistence of a plurality of concurring sources of political and legal authority, the latter emerged through a process which led to the gradual centralization of power in the hands of a sovereign and the identification of law with the orders issued by the latter. The doctrine of the rule of law is characterized by a dual assumption: political pessimism and normative optimism. As much as a strong political power is considered an indispensable precondition for the establishment and maintenance of a stable order and, therefore, for granting protection to individuals, it also represents a threat for the latter: the more power tends to be concentrated, the more the risk of an arbitrary use of it. On the other hand, law is presented as the way out of such aporia: the inherent dangers of power can be addressed by channeling it through the forms of law, thereby making it predictable, stable, checkable, and contestable. Especially from the late Eighteenth century, prompted by the advent of new constitutional experiences and by the establishment of national states, the concept of the rule of law became subject to a lively debate within different legal traditions and inspired the design of specific institutional architectures. On one hand, the various elaborations of the doctrine have been united by the common concern with the risk of arbitrary power. Moreover, a growing process of cross-influences between distinct political-legal frameworks have provided a shared vocabulary which has smoothed out many of the differences distinguishing the Continental and Anglo-American perspectives. On the other hand, the very success achieved by such theory has contributed to make the rule of law an “essentially contested concept”. The attempts to elaborate a taxonomy of the different accounts of the rule of law which characterize the contemporary debate has led to the identification of thinner and thicker version of a formal, substantive and procedural perspectives. Formal conceptions are distinguished by the relevance accorded to enacted law, and their formal requirements. The rule of law is a form of government constituted by a system of rules of law characterized by features such as clarity, generality, non-contradictoriness, non-retroactivity, stability and foreseeability. Substantive conceptions, on the other hand, identify the content of some rules as essential elements of the rule of law, i.e., the protection of fundamental rights and

Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. These shifts may be natural, but since the 1800s, human activities have been the main driver of climate change, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels (like coal, oil, and gas) increasing heat-trapping greenhouse gas levels in the Earth’s atmosphere. Increasing greenhouse gas emissions from human activity act like a blanket wrapped around the earth, trapping the sun’s heat and raising temperatures. Examples of greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change include carbon dioxide and methane. Effects of climate change Warmer temperatures over time are changing weather patterns and disrupting the usual balance of nature, posing many risks to human beings and all other forms of life on Earth. NEARLY ALL LAND AREAS ARE SEEING MORE HOT DAYS AND HEAT WAVES 2021 was one of the hottest years on record. Higher temperatures increase heat-related illnesses and can make it more difficult to work and move around. Wildfires start more easily and spread more rapidly when conditions are hotter.  Temperature rise is only the beginning of the story. Because the Earth is a system, where everything is connected, changes in one area often influence changes in all others. The consequences of climate change now include: PEOPLE ARE EXPERIENCING CLIMATE CHANGE IN DIVERSE WAYS. It affects our health, ability to grow food, housing, safety and work. Some of us are already more vulnerable to climate impacts, such as people living in small island developing states. Conditions like sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion have advanced to the point where whole communities have had to relocate. In the future, the number of “climate refugees” is expected to rise dramatically. THE ISSUES CAN SEEM DAUNTING. When you confront the devastation that climate change has done and will predictably cause, it can seem too big and too complex to get your hands around, something that hopefully the government or the UN or scientists are working on. That’s why 2030 or Bust. We’ve developed the science, models and action scenarios that give you the power to make a real impact in reversing the emissions trend and ending the crisis. But first you have to break up the mindset that you can’t make much difference. WE CAN, IF ENOUGH OF US TAKE THE RIGHT ACTIONS, BRIDGE THE 2030 EMISSIONS GAP. So that we can not only contain the damage already done but begin to clean it up. Comprehending Climate Change Climate change refers to long-term fluctuations in temperature and weather patterns. Variations in the solar cycle are generally responsible for such fluctuations. But, since the 1800s human activities such as burning of fossil fuels and coal have been the drivers for such changes.  When fossil fuels are burned, it causes combustion which increases the heat and light leading to rise in the temperature of the earth, also known as Greenhouse effect. For Eg: Deforestation is one of the major reasons for increased emission of Carbon-Dioxide, Garbage landfills are primary source for methane emissions and if we look around the waste production has tremendously increased over the years. Also, Industrialization, fuel-based transportation and rampant construction are other major contributors for increased greenhouse gas emissions. Alarming Numbers Greenhouse gas concentrations are at their highest levels in 2 million years. Emissions are continuing to rise. As a result, the Earth is presently around 1.1 degrees Celsius warmer than it was in the late 1800s. The most recent decade (2011-2020) has been the warmest on record.  It is perceived that climate change mainly entails higher temperatures. However, the temperature rise is merely the beginning of the narrative. As everything is interconnected in the ecosystem. Thus, shifts in one aspect will equally impact others. Research has shown that, If the global average surface temperatures rise between 1.5-2 degrees, then world’s wealthiest countries will experience fewer changes in their local climate as well as crop yields due to well-built information systems in place whereas low income or less developed countries will suffer more in terms of food security and food safety due to climate change and lesser resilient crop infrastructure. Recently released “Vulnerability assessment report” by Indian Council of Agricultural Research, ICAR reveals that out of 573 rural districts (excluding Andaman and Nicobar Islands) 109 districts are very high-risk districts and 201 districts are risk districts. Considering the current situation of climate change in India integrated modeling simulation studies indicated that by 2049 the mean temperature of these districts will increase by a minimum of 1.3 degrees. For a tropical country like India, Rise in temperature may affect the various crop yields affecting the production and consumption pattern of food across the year. The Consequences of Climate Change on Food and Nutrition security One hand increase in CO2 concentrations are good for crop growth but on the contrary CO2 emissions are resulting in frequent climatic fluctuations like intense heat, severe weather and droughts which are huge threat to In-demand crops like wheat and maize. According to some projections, in the absence of successful adaptation, worldwide yields could fall by up to 30% by 2050.  Countries already dealing with violence, pollution, deforestation, and other issues are likely to bear the brunt of these consequences. The 2 billion people who already lack adequate food, particularly smallholder farmers and other individuals living in poverty, will be struck the hardest. Despite decades of global commitment, hunger and food insecurity continue at alarming rates. According to the State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report, approximately 750 million people experienced extreme food insecurity in 2019.  The number of undernourished people or food insecurity is increasing, with climate shocks playing a significant role. Climate change will raise food prices, reduce food supply, and promote instability and conflict due to competition for water and arable land unless immediate action is taken. As per a recent report by Children’s Climate Risk Index (CCRI) “Climate crisis is a child crisis”. With an estimated 850 million children 1-3 worldwide are living in areas where environmental and climatic shocks overlap. Children will suffer more than adults and they require more food and water per unit body weight and have less resilience to hold up against extreme and harsh

Legal Power the right and power to interpret and apply the law. The concept of legal power (often called legal competence) is important in the law since, with regard to actions having legal effect, the “exercise of legal power” delimits those actions for which manifestation of intention to achieve a legal effect is essential for the effect to ensue. The paper proposes a definition that captures this feature of legal power and marks it off from “direct effect,” as well as from permissibility and practical ability to achieve the legal effect. This analysis of power is limited to the “immediate” legal power of a physical person characterized by the power-holder achieving a legal result by the power-holder’s own behavior (not by representatives acting on behalf of the power-holder). It is argued that in the literature on power the concept of legal power is frequently construed in such a way that it becomes either too broad or too narrow. Under the rule of law, power is the sovereign will of the people expressed as non-arbitrary laws that—theoretically, if not perfectly in practice— apply to everyone equally.  This sovereign power also limits the exercise of governmental power so that it does not exceed the authority granted to it by the people.              There are two parts to this that are downright revolutionary.  The first is the fact that the people are sovereign—not some divine-right monarch, or some combination of kings, lords, and commons.  The people set the terms of how they will be governed in written constitutions. The second is that the people limit the exercise of power by their government through laws that are not capricious or arbitrary, and that apply uniformly, even to those leaders and representatives who enact and enforce the people’s law.  Together these two innovations in political science provide a profound blueprint for self-government:  the people are in charge, they are the fountain of authority from which the rules are made, and the rules apply to everyone.             The United States of America did not directly import this particular blueprint for power from Great Britain, though British constitutionalism was indispensable to our thinking on the matter.  King George III inherited a monarchy limited by constitutional revolution, the Glorious Revolution of 1688/89, which shifted the locus of sovereignty in Britain:  the king was no longer the divine-right, absolute, arbitrary, fountain of law and justice of the past, but instead, Parliament—the House of Commons and the House of Lords—when working in concert with the king, constituted the ultimate authority in Great Britain and its empire.  This revolution in constitutionalism made us North-American colonists incredibly proud to be liberty-loving Englishmen and women, until, of course, taxes, declarations of parliamentary will, quartering of troops in private homes, and tea parties changed our minds.              But if we did not have the benefit of the legacy of the Glorious Revolution—locating sovereignty in a body representing all the people in the realm, and linking that to Parliament’s lawmaking function—we would not have been as well situated to make the intellectual leap to we, the people, are sovereign.  It wasn’t easy to put this popular sovereignty into practice; it took a great deal of experimenting during the 1770s and 1780s to figure out just how to implement this quite radical notion.  And yet, the combination of historical research and hindsight, paired with innovative experimentation across the states, the framers of both state constitutions and the US Constitution managed to create and execute an enduring framework whereby we, the people, are in charge.  And thus our American system: the people are sovereign—not your president, your member of Congress, your governor, or your state representative.  You—we—the people wield the ultimate power to make law, to make the rules that are meant to apply to all, equally, and to ensure that we all live under, not above or apart from, those rules. This innovation in political thought, and its implementation in constitutional government, is an American marvel, and in its profundity, is truly extraordinary. The term power of attorney (POA) refers to a legal authorization that gives a designated person the power to act for someone else. As such, a POA gives the agent or attorney-in-fact the authority to act on behalf of the principal. The agent may be given broad or limited authority to make decisions about the principal’s property, finances, investments, or medical care. There are two main types of POAs, financial and health care—both of which provide the attorney-in-fact with general or limited powers. Types of Powers of Attorney: The two key types of POAs are financial and health care. We outline some of the main differences between these two and highlight some of the main types of financial POAs. Health Care Power of Attorney (HCPOA) The principal can sign a durable power of attorney for health care, or health care POA (HCPOA), if they want an agent to have the power to make health-related decisions. This document also called a health care proxy, outlines the principal’s consent to give the agent POA privileges in the event of an unfortunate medical condition. American Bar Association The POA for health care is legally bound to oversee medical care decisions on behalf of the principal. As such, it kicks in when the principal can no longer make health-related decisions on their own. Financial Power of Attorney The financial POA is a document that allows an agent to manage the business and financial affairs of the principal, such as signing checks, filing tax returns, mailing and depositing Social Security checks, and managing investment accounts when and if the latter becomes unable to understand or make decisions. The agent must carry out the principal’s wishes to the best of their ability, at least to the extent of what the agreement spells out as the agent’s responsibility. A financial POA gives that individual a wide range of power over one’s bank account, including the ability to make deposits and withdrawals, sign checks, and make or change beneficiary designations.Financial POAs can be

Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages. The UDHR is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels (all containing references to it in their preambles). Preamble The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages. The UDHR is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels (all containing references to it in their preambles).Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law, Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations, Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms, Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge, Now, therefore, The General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.  Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. Article 3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. Article 4 No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. Article 5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Article 6 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. Article 7 All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination. Article 8 Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. Article 9 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. Article 10 Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him. Article 11 Article 12 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. Article 13 Article 14 Article 15 Article 16 Article 17 Article 18 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or