The Hindu Editorial Analysis- 20th January 2025 | Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly - UPSC PDF Download

A Surge in Radical Governments, the Hope of Democracy

Why in News?

 The article discusses global patterns of legitimizing radical Islamic groups after they seize power, with implications for Afghanistan, Syria, and Bangladesh. 

Afghanistan in 2021: The Taliban’s Takeover

• The Taliban took control of Afghanistan on August 15, 2021, following a rapid offensive.
• During the chaotic withdrawal, a suicide attack by the Islamic State killed 13 U.S. troops, and $7.1 billion worth of U.S. weaponry was abandoned.
• Despite the Taliban’s controversial past, countries like the U.S., China, and Russia began engaging with them, justifying this as a means to promote women’s rights and prevent terrorism.
• India, as the president of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in August 2021, played a role in shaping UNSC Resolution 2593. This resolution aimed to ensure that Afghan soil would not be used for terrorism, particularly against India, and highlighted groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed.

Evolving World Engagement with the Taliban

• In December 2021, the UNSC permitted direct donor funding to the Taliban without requiring accountability measures.
• Despite the Taliban’s subsequent actions, such as restricting women’s rights and denying inclusive governance, global powers largely ignored these developments and continued their engagement.

Syria in 2024: A New Crisis

• In 2024, Abu Muhammad al-Jolani, leader of Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), seized power in Syria, overthrowing President Bashar al-Assad.
• Despite his past association with al-Qaeda and HTS being designated a terrorist organization, the U.S. and the West began supporting al-Jolani.
• The U.S. even removed a $10 million bounty on al-Jolani, illustrating a trend of legitimizing groups after they gain power.

Growing Extremism in Bangladesh

• In Bangladesh, an interim military-led government under Muhammad Yunus has taken control, reportedly accommodating Islamic radical groups.
• Groups such as Ansarullah Bangla Team (ABT), Jamaat-e-Islami, and Hefazat-e-Islam are gaining influence, posing threats to minorities and promoting anti-India sentiments.
• The military coup has provided a platform for extremist ideologies, reversing the progress made under Sheikh Hasina’s government since 2008.

India’s Role and Concerns

• India has historically supported Bangladesh during critical periods, such as the 2009 Bangladesh Rifles revolt, and has worked to strengthen bilateral relations over the past two decades.
• The rise of extremism in Bangladesh poses a significant security concern for India, which needs to avoid viewing the issue solely through a religious lens.
• India’s focus remains on protecting its bilateral relationship with Bangladesh and ensuring regional stability.

The Need for Caution

• Global trends suggest that capturing power can legitimize radical groups, as seen in Afghanistan, Syria, and potentially Bangladesh.
• For Bangladesh, a regression to an Islamic extremist regime would reverse the democratic advancements made since 2008.
• The international community, particularly India, must monitor and address the resurgence of extremism to protect regional security.

Conclusion

• The global trend of legitimizing radical groups following their capture of power poses a threat to democracy and stability.
•  India needs to proactively address emerging threats, especially in neighboring Bangladesh, to ensure regional security and protect its strategic interests.

Recasting insolvency resolution

Why in News?

This article explains issues with India’s insolvency system, highlighting delays, lack of expertise, and reforms needed to improve efficiency.

Introduction to the IBC and Its Importance

• The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, is a significant reform aimed at resolving insolvencies in a structured and timely manner.
• Initially, the IBC improved India’s global business reputation by addressing issues related to bad loans and defaulters.
• However, as the law evolved, challenges regarding institutional capacity and procedural inefficiencies became evident, especially highlighted by the Supreme Court in the Jet Airways case.

Challenges in the Institutional Framework

Burden on Tribunals:

• The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and its appellate body, NCLAT, are responsible for handling both insolvency cases under the IBC and matters under the Companies Act.
• This dual responsibility has led to a significant backlog, causing delays in resolutions.

Outdated Structure of NCLT:

• The NCLT was established with a structure designed in 1999 and operationalised in 2016, which is no longer suitable for current economic demands.
• With only 63 sanctioned members, many of whom work across multiple benches, the tribunal is ill-equipped to manage modern caseloads effectively.

Inefficient Operations:

• Some NCLT benches do not operate full working days or are occupied with cases from other benches, contributing to inefficiency.
• As a result, the average time for insolvency resolution has increased, indicating a decline in operational efficiency.

Deficiencies in Domain Expertise and Integrity

Lack of Domain Knowledge:

• Members of the tribunal often lack the necessary expertise to handle complex insolvency cases effectively.
• The Supreme Court highlighted this issue in the Jet Airways case, emphasising the importance of specialized knowledge in such matters.

Bureaucratic Challenges:

• There is a lack of an effective system for urgent listings, and registry staff have excessive discretion in managing cases, leading to bureaucratic inefficiencies.
• The Supreme Court has noted instances where NCLT/NCLAT members have defied its orders, raising concerns about judicial integrity.

Procedural Inefficiencies

Mandatory Hearings:

• Requiring hearings for all applications, including progress reports, adds unnecessary delays to the process.

Limited Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution:

• The system underutilizes alternative dispute resolution methods, which could help alleviate some of the pressure on the framework.

Proposed Solutions for Reform

Mandatory Mediation:

• Implementing mandatory mediation before insolvency applications could reduce the burden on tribunals and expedite the process.

Specialized Benches:

• Establishing specialized benches for different types of cases can enhance efficiency and ensure that cases are handled by experts in the relevant fields.

Infrastructure and Staffing:

• Ensuring adequate courtrooms and qualified, permanent staff is crucial for the effective operation of tribunals.

Hybrid Model:

• Adopting a hybrid approach that combines judicial experience with domain expertise is necessary for handling complex insolvency matters effectively.

Conclusion

• India’s insolvency regime needs to evolve beyond mere debt resolution to become a catalyst for economic growth.
• Implementing bold reforms aimed at enhancing institutional capacity, procedural efficiency, and infrastructure is essential to attract foreign investment and improve overall economic performance.