Insta– QUED ( Questions from Editorials. ) 11 August 2021 – INSIGHTSIAS

Solution: b)

Keoladeo National Park formerly known as the Bharatpur Bird Sanctuary in Bharatpur, Rajasthan, is a famous avifauna sanctuary that hosts thousands of birds, especially during the winter season.

It is also a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

It is a man-made and man-managed wetland.

Due to its strategic location in the middle of Central Asian migratory flyway and presence of water, large congregations of ducks, geese, coots, pelicans and waders arrive in the winter.

The park was the only known wintering site of the central population of the Siberian Crane, and also serves as a wintering area for other globally threatened species such as the Greater Spotted Eagle and Imperial Eagle.

Source                  Source

Solution: d)

Prime editing is a ‘search-and-replace’ genome editing technology in molecular biology by which the genome of living organisms may be modified. The technology directly writes new genetic information into a targeted DNA site.

Source

Solution: b)

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is an intergovernmental organization located in The Hague, Netherlands. It is not a court in the traditional sense, but provides services of arbitral tribunal to resolve disputes that arise out of international agreements between member states, international organizations or private parties. 

The cases span a range of legal issues involving territorial and maritime boundaries, sovereignty, human rights, international investment, and international and regional trade.

The organization is not a United Nations agency, but the PCA is an official United Nations Observer.

Source                  Source

Solution: c)

What is Article 32?

• It is one of the fundamental rights listed in the Constitution that each citizen is entitled. Article 32 deals with the ‘Right to Constitutional Remedies’, or affirms the right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred in Part III of the Constitution.
• It states that the Supreme Court “shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part”. The right guaranteed by this Article “shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by this Constitution”.

• During the 1975 Emergency, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, in the ADM Jabalpur vs Shivakant Shukla case, had ruled that the right to constitutional remedies under Article 32 would remain suspended during a national emergency.
• The 44th Amendment also stated that according to Article 359, the president could issue orders suspending the right to move any court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, under Article 32, during a national emergency, with the exception of Article 20 ( deals with protection of certain rights in case of conviction for offences) and Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty).

In civil or criminal matters, the first remedy available to an aggrieved person is that of trial courts, followed by an appeal in the High Court and then the Supreme Court. When it comes to violation of fundamental rights, an individual can approach the High Court under Article 226 or the Supreme Court directly under Article 32. Article 226, however, is not a fundamental right like Article 32.

Source

Solution: c)

The original Special Marriage Act was enacted in 1872. It was moved by an eminent jurist and Legislative Council member named Henry Maine. It was enacted following a campaign launched in 1860 by Brahmo Samaj, especially Keshab Chandra Sen, for simpler marriage ceremonies. But it had one problem: it required that two people of different faiths who wish to get married must renounce their respective religions. By 19th century standards, the mere fact that this law paved the way for inter-faith marriages was a good first step.

But its requirement of renouncing one’s religion was not compatible with modern ideas of liberalism, individualism and autonomy of the individual. So, the 1954 law replaced this 1872 Act, and the requirement to renounce one’s religion was removed. Basically, this law was the first step towards a Uniform Civil Code.

Source