10 PM Current Affairs Quiz : October 12

In March 2011, the Supreme Court of India passed a historic judgement-law permitting Passive Euthanasia in the country.

• After the case of Aruna Shanbaug’s euthanasia, the Supreme Court laid the following guidelines:

1. A decision has to be taken to discontinue life support either by the parents or the spouse or other close relatives, or in the absence of any of them, such a decision can be taken even by a person or a body of persons acting as a next friend.  Thus, statement 1 is false.
2. Even if a decision is taken by the near relatives or doctors or next friend to withdraw life support, such a decision requires approval from the High Court concerned. Thus, statement 2 is false.
3. When such an application is filled the Chief Justice of the High Court should forthwith constitute a Bench of at least two Judges who should decide to grant approval or not.

Statement 1 is incorrect. The National Green Tribunal is a statutory body established by a Government Notification using the powers of Section 3 of the NGT Act 2010. It has replaced National Environment Appellate Authority.

Statement 2 is correct. The main objective of NGT is to provide effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment.

Statement 3 is incorrect. The National Green Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by principles of natural justice.

Exception 2 of section 372 is not criminalized by Law. Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape

Statement 1 is correct

Statement 2 is incorrect

Global economic outlook reports is released by IMF.

Global economic prospect report is released by World Bank

The protection under article 21 is provided against both arbitrary legislative action and arbitrary executive action.
In the famous Gopalan case (1950), the Supreme Court has taken a narrow interpretation of the Article 21. It held that the protection under Article 21 is available only against arbitrary executive action and not from the arbitrary legislative action. This meant that the State can deprive the right to life and personal liberty of a person based on a law. This is because of the expression ‘procedure established by law’ in article 21, which is different from the expression ‘ due process of law’. Hence, the validity of a law that has prescribed a procedure cannot be questioned on the ground that the law is unreasonable, unfair and unjust.
But in Menaka case (1978), the Supreme Court overruled its judgement in the Gopalan case by taking a wider interpretation of the Article 21.  It ruled that the right to life and personal liberty of a person can be deprived by a law that is reasonable, fair and just.
In other words, it has introduced the Americal expression ‘due process of law’. In effect, the protection under Article 21 should be available not only against arbitrary executive action but also against arbitrary legislative action.

Statement 1 is correct as IUCN is the only environmental organization with official United Nations Observer Status, ensuring that nature conservation has a voice at the highest level of international governance.

Statement 2 is correct as IUCN’s expertise and extensive network provide a solid foundation for a large and diverse portfolio of conservation projects around the world. Combining the latest science with the traditional knowledge of local communities, these projects work to reverse habitat loss, restore ecosystems and improve people’s well-being.