Amnesty scheme, incentives for repayment in new foreign trade policy
An amnesty scheme for one-time settlement of default in export obligation, a push towards e-commerce exports, and incentives to exports that are paid for by rupee, are the key focus areas of the government’s new foreign trade policy.
The new foreign trade policy also proposes to reduce export licence fee for MSMEs along with allowing merchanting trade, involving shipment of goods from one foreign country to another without touching Indian ports but involving an Indian intermediary.
Under the amnesty scheme, an online portal will be launched for registration and a six-month window till September 30 will be available to exporters to avail the scheme. It will cover all pending cases of default in export obligation of authorisations – these can be regularised on payment of all customs duties exempted in proportion to unfulfilled export obligation.
The maximum interest is capped at 100 percent of such duties exempted, and no interest is payable on the portion of additional customs duty and special additional customs duty. Cases under investigation for fraud and diversion are not eligible under this scheme.
In the foreign trade policy, which will come into effect from April 1, the government reiterated its $2 trillion target for exports of goods and services by 2030 with a shift from incentives to remission and entitlement-based regime.
The previous foreign trade policy for 2015-2020 had targeted exports of $900 billion by 2020; this target was extended along with the policy for three years till March 2023. India is, however, likely to end 2022-23 with total exports of $760-770 billion as against $676 billion in 2021-22.
The new foreign trade policy has not put any end-date to the trade policy targets.
Govt to ease rules on construction around protected monuments
The government will soon liberalise construction activity in the vicinity of protected monuments across the country.
Currently, construction up to 100 metres around protected monuments is prohibited, while an area up to 200 metres beyond the prohibited area is regulated, under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological sites and Remains (AMASR) Act, and has stringent rules in terms of construction-related permit.
No construction work or related activity is generally permitted in prohibited and regulated areas around all 3,696 protected monuments across the country, unless a specific approval is taken from the National Monuments Authority (NMA).
Even as the government can bring about liberalisation in case of most monuments, for UNESCO World Heritage Sites (India has 40 of them, including Taj Mahal in Agra, Dholavira in Gujarat, Ramappa Temple in Telangana and Red Fort and Qutub Minar in Delhi), these restrictions may stay, since construction in regulated and prohibited zones may impact these heritage structures. UNESCO has generally been encouraging such a concept to be complied with in the case of all world heritage sites.
The origin of ‘hue and cry’ notice
The phrase ‘hue and cry’ in contemporary terms is often associated with a strong protest or public anger or disapproval on any issue. However, in policing terms, the phrase traces its origin to 1285 when England’s King Edward I signed the “Statute of Winchester” to deal with security and peacekeeping on a local level by revamping the existing police system. The Statute made it a law stating that “if citizens saw a crime, they not only had to report it, but take up a cry to alert the police.”
The ‘hue and cry’ rule simply meant that if a suspect or a criminal was running down the street in front of some bystanders, then each of them had to yell to help the police identify and catch them. The Statute said that “anyone, either a constable or a private citizen, who witnessed a crime shall make hue and cry, and that the hue and cry must be kept up against the fleeing criminal from town to town and from county to county, until the felon is apprehended and delivered to the sheriff”.
“Those who raised a hue and cry falsely are themselves guilty of a crime”
Police issues a ‘hue and cry notice’ when it requires help of public in cases such as locating missing persons, identifying unclaimed bodies, looking out for a suspect among others.
Gamosa: a marker of Assamese Identity
The phulam gamosa is steeped in emotive weight and is considered to be a symbol of Assamese cultural identity.
“It has a deep symbolic value in Assam, be it religiously, socially or culturally. Socially, it is gifted as a symbol of mutual respect and solidarity. It also has a special relationship with the Vaishnavite culture in Assam. The axon, the main place of worship, is considered incomplete without one.
During moments when Assamese sub-nationalism took centre stage — the Assam Agitation of the early 1980s and more recently, the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protests in the state — the gamosa was prominently used by protesters as a marker of Assamese identity.
On the other hand, the Bengali gamcha does not have such symbolism attached to it and is a utilitarian item for household use.
Professor Baruah points out that a completely different garment — a long scarf called an uttariya — is used in cultural programmes and to welcome guests in Bengali society.
The gamosa has a national identity. People have strong emotions towards it, they respect and honour it. It has its own distinct identity and that was sought to be diluted. Things that are a part of folk culture can’t be diluted, especially after the gamosa has received a GI tag,” said Lurinjyoti Gogoi.
Rajasthan became the first state in India to pass the Right to Health (RTH) bill.
The bill allows free access to out-patient and inpatient services in all government and selected private hospitals in the state. Ever since the bill was passed, the medical fraternity has been up in arms against it. In a nutshell, the majority of doctors feel that the RTH bill is an assault on their “business model”. This needs to be seen in context of a nation reeling under the broken moral compass across various spheres of life be it political, social or professional and not merely limited to health care providers.
It is essential to emphasise that Rajasthan is not a “healthy” state by any standards. In 2022, in a report titled “Healthy states, progressive India”, the NITI Aayog, World Bank and the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, had placed Rajasthan at 16th position among 19 big states. As per the National Family Health Survey -5 (2019-21), the infant mortality rate and the neonatal mortality rate in the state are 30.3 per 1,000 live births and 20.2 per 1,000 live births respectively. Such high rates of childhood mortality speak poorly of the healthcare infrastructure of the state. It is one of the states with highest levels of nutritional anaemia among women and children. The doctor-population ratio of the state is at an astoundingly low level of five doctors per 10,000 population (in comparison, it is 21 per 10,000 population in Jammu and Kashmir). With such a dismal health picture, Rajasthan was the ideal state to formulate and implement the RTH bill.
The protest of the state’s medical fraternity against the bill is extraordinary. We live in an era where the invincible power of capitalism has triggered a cascade of health crises. Gone are the days of medicine being the noblest of all professions. As per official data, more than 78 per cent of healthcare in India is now delivered by private players. The private physician has thus nearly completely replaced the conventional government doctor and it is this private physician who is most unhappy with the RTH bill in Rajasthan. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) has threatened to organise a national level protest against the RTH bill.
The main grudge of the protesting doctors of Rajasthan is the clause in the bill according to which any resident of the state will have the right to emergency treatment and care without prepayment at all hospitals and healthcare centres. This of course upsets the “business model” on which most private healthcare set ups work. The anxiety of the doctors about this clause is twofold: First, who decides what can be classified as a medical emergency, and second, the bureaucratic and political control and arm twisting when it comes to admitting or reimbursing payment for these patients.
The anxiety and frustration of the doctors of Rajasthan over a just, patient-friendly bill shows how far the Indian physician is from the common man.
Earn money isn’t a crime, but the difference between earning and extracting money is so subtle in the practice of modern medicine that it isn’t too difficult to cross the line.
Rajasthan’s RTH is a legal entitlement for the patient which will hopefully prevent many doctors from crossing that line. It may be interesting to note that Rajasthan also has one of the highest incidences of violence against healthcare professionals in the country. Violence against healthcare professionals is multifactorial but at the heart of this violence lies the deep mistrust of the patient or his kin of the system in general and the doctor in particular. Embracing a patient friendly bill would have been an opportunity for the doctors of Rajasthan to douse this mistrust to some extent.
The physician is in direct contact with people. Society and the physician are mirrors to each other. If the physician of today has to look good in the mirror, he/she has to help society look good. The easiest way to make society look good is to bring equality and justice and this may be at the cost of the physician’s ability to earn money.
Credit: Indian Express