1.

About the NJAC and 99 constitution amendment Bill:

th

NJAC is a body responsible for the appointment and transfer of judges to the
higher judiciary in India. JAC Bill seeks to replace the collegium system of
appointing the judges of Supreme Court and 24 High Courts with judicial
appointments commission wherein the executive will have a say in appointing
the judges.

A new article, Article 124A, (which provides for the composition

of the NJAC) will be inserted into the Constitution.

The Bill provides for the procedure to be followed by the NJAC

for recommending persons for appointment as Chief Justice of
India and other Judges of the Supreme Court (SC), and Chief
Justice and other Judges of High Courts (HC).

According to the bill the commission will consist of the following

members:

Chief Justice of India (Chairperson, ex officio)

Two other senior judges of the Supreme Court next to the Chief
Justice of India ex officio

The Union Minister of Law and Justice, ex-officio

Two eminent persons (to be nominated by a committee

consisting of the Chief Justice of India, Prime Minister of India and
the Leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha or where there is no
such Leader of Opposition, then, the Leader of single largest
Opposition Party in Lok Sabha), provided that of the two eminent
persons, one person would be from the Scheduled Castes or
Scheduled Tribes or OBC or minority communities or a woman.
The eminent persons shall be nominated for a period of three
years and shall not be eligible for re-nomination.

Functions of the Commission:

Recommending persons for appointment as Chief Justice of

India, Judges of the Supreme Court, Chief Justices of High Courts
and other Judges of High Courts.

Recommending transfer of Chief Justices and other Judges of

High Courts from one High Court to any other High Court.

Ensuring that the persons recommended are of ability and

integrity.

Under the present Collegium system, the Chief Justice of India would consult
the four senior most judges of the Supreme Court for Supreme Court
appointments and two senior-most judges for high court appointments.
How the NJAC will help:

The NJAC, once it came into existence, is expected to usher in

transparency in judicial appointments in the highest courts and
end the highest judiciarys two-decade-old grip over
appointments of judges through the collegium system.

It would restore an equal role for the executive in higher

judicial appointments.

What are the allegations against it?

Petitions were filed in the SC contending that by passing the NJAC Bill,
Parliament had altered the basic structure of the Constitution and
encroached into judicial independence.
How judicial independence is being encroached:

Independence of the judiciary includes the necessity to

eliminate political influence even at the stage of appointment of
a judge. This is being violated.

This bill, as passed by the two houses of Parliament, takes

away the primacy of the collective opinion of the Chief Justice of

India and the two senior most Judges of the Supreme Court of
India.

Although the six-member Commission had the CJI as

chairperson and two senior most Supreme Court judges as
members, there was no primacy for them. Even their collective
recommendation of a candidate as judge could be frozen if any
two non-judicial members on the panel vetoed it.

The petition says the NJAC Act did not give any suitability
criteria for appointment as judge, leaving it to the Commission
to frame them.

2. NET NEUTRALITY

Clamour for Net neutrality grows online

Social media has been flooded with posts on Net neutrality, demanding that
service providers treat all data online equally. People on social media have
been saying that the Union government should strive to maintain Internet
neutrality.

The Telecom Ministry has constituted a committee to decide on

the issue. A final call would be taken after a ministry committee
submits its report in the second week of May.

Background:

Recently, telecom provider Airtel launched Airtel Zero, a

scheme through which companies can pay Airtel and have users
browse their service free of data charges. The practice of
allowing apps to be free of data charges to the consumer is
called zero rating in telecom parlance.

Airtel Zero is widely perceived as a violation of net neutrality

which could potentially stifle innovation and startup growth.
There is also an allegation that it effectively tilts the balance in
favor of the bigger players.

By paying to be on Airtel Zero, companies can make sure that

their users get free access to their service, while smaller players
are at a disadvantage. However, Airtel has said that zero rating
does not violate net neutrality as it lowers the cost of access and
it is non-discriminatory.

In December 2014, Airtel had also tried to introduce a plan to

charge Internet telephony companies like Skype and Whatsapp a
higher tariff. However, the telecom operator withdrew the plan
after public outrage.

Net neutrality:
Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments
should treat all data on the Internet equally, not discriminating or charging
differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached
equipment, or mode of communication.

Neutrality proponents claim that telecom companies seek to

impose a tiered service model in order to control the pipeline and
thereby remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and oblige
subscribers to buy their otherwise uncompetitive services. Many
believe net neutrality to be primarily important as a preservation
of current freedoms.

There are no laws enforcing net neutrality in India. Although

TRAI guidelines for the Unified Access Service license promote
net neutrality, it does not enforce it. The Information Technology
Act 2000 also does not prohibit companies from throttling their
service in accordance with their business interests.

Proponents of the principle of net neutrality hold that all traffic on the
Internet should be treated equally or in other words, service providers such as
Airtel should allow access to all content without favouring any particular
product or website.
Telecom/service providers argument:
The telecom/ISPs argue that they have made huge investments in broadband
capacity, and, therefore, they should be allowed to charge for the services,
which generate lot of traffic. Preventing the service providers from charging
for over-the-top services (OTT) services would mean that they would reduce
their investments in building networks.
What the TRAI says?

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India chief has said even

though Airtels move is against net neutrality it is not illegal as
there is no legal framework.

The net neutrality debate becomes even more relevant in case of India where
the penetration of smart phones is increasing and efforts are on to bring more
people to the Internet, through the digital India campaign