Daily Current Affairs 06 August 2026 – IAS Current Affairs

Current Affairs 06 August 2026 focuses on the Prelims-Mains perspective. Major events are :

---

Caste Discrimination In India

Source: The Hindu
GS I: Indian Society

---

Why in the News?

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) has reviewed India for the first time since 2007.

News in Brief

---

• CERD expressed “grave concern” over reports of violence and discrimination against minority ethnic and ethno-religious groups, dalits and non-citizens.
• India ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) in 1968.
• India has argued that caste discrimination falls outside the Convention, as caste is distinct from race.
• However, CERD has interpreted discrimination based on descent or inherited status more broadly.

CERD and International Convention

---

• The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is the United Nations body that checks how countries follow the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).
• The Convention (ICERD)- A global treaty aiming to stop unfair treatment based on race, skin color, family background, or national and ethnic roots.
• The Committee (CERD)- A group of independent experts that reviews reports from countries to see how well they stop racial discrimination.
• India officially joined and accepted the treaty in 1968.

Key Highlights from CERD Review

---

Caste Discrimination

• India has maintained that caste discrimination does not fall within Article 1 of ICERD, as caste and race are distinct categories.
• However, CERD has adopted a broader interpretation of discrimination based on descent or inherited status, enabling it to examine discrimination arising from caste and other inherited social hierarchies.
• The issue highlights the broader debate between India’s constitutional approach to caste-based affirmative action and international human-rights standards.

Concerns regarding law-enforcement

• CERD also expressed concern over reports of violence and discriminatory treatment by law-enforcement authorities against Dalits, ethnic and ethno-religious minorities, non-citizens and other vulnerable groups.
• The Committee further noted the lack of updated and detailed information on investigations, prosecutions and sanctions, making it difficult to assess the effectiveness of accountability mechanisms.

Manual Sewer Cleaning

• The continued practice of manual sewer cleaning and hazardous sanitation work, despite legal prohibition, points to a gap between legislation and its implementation.
• The issue is closely linked with caste-based occupational practices, human dignity, social exclusion and socio-economic vulnerability, highlighting the need for stronger enforcement as well as rehabilitation and alternative livelihood opportunities.

Citizenship and Electoral Rights

• The committee also raised concerns relating to citizenship and political participation, including the alleged exclusion of vulnerable groups through the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and large-scale deletions during Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
• These developments have wider implications for citizenship rights, political representation, equality before law and democratic participation.

Hate Speech

• CERD has also drawn attention to the legal framework dealing with identity-based hate speech, noting that the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita does not expressly recognise racist hate speech as a separate offence.
• This has renewed discussion on whether existing laws are adequate to address casteist, racist and other forms of identity-based incitement, while maintaining the constitutional protection of freedom of speech.

Civil Society and Human Rights

• Concerns were also raised over the
  • Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA),
  • Unlawful  Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA)
  • Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)

and their impact on civil society and human-rights organizations.

• While these laws serve important objectives relating to national security, financial regulation and public order, their implementation needs to remain transparent, proportionate and consistent with fundamental rights, so that legitimate civil-society activities are not unnecessarily restricted.

National Human Rights Commission

• The NHRC is India’s key statutory institution for protecting and promoting human rights.
• Its role is particularly important in cases involving vulnerable communities, custodial violence, discrimination and other alleged rights violations.
• However, concerns over its independence, composition and institutional effectiveness have gained attention following the recommendation by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) to downgrade India’s NHRC accreditation.
• Strengthening the autonomy and credibility of such institutions is essential for ensuring effective domestic accountability and access to justice, while also reducing the need to rely on international mechanisms for scrutiny.

Data Deficit and Accountability

• A key concern highlighted by the issue is the lack of timely, reliable and disaggregated data on vulnerable and disadvantaged communities.
• Data classified across factors such as caste, tribe, gender, religion, ethnicity, citizenship status and socio-economic conditions is important for identifying patterns of inequality and assessing whether government policies are reaching those who need them most.
• The delay in conducting the Census and the slow availability of some NCRB data further complicate this assessment.
• In the absence of updated data, it becomes difficult to determine whether the socio-economic conditions of vulnerable groups are improving or worsening and whether existing welfare and affirmative-action measures are producing the desired outcomes.
• Thus, reliable disaggregated data is essential for moving from identifying inequality to designing targeted policies, monitoring their implementation and ensuring accountability.
• Without such evidence, independent assessment of the government’s progress in addressing caste- and faith-based discrimination remains limited.

Constitutional and Legal Framework in India

---

India already has a strong constitutional foundation for combating discrimination.

Fundamental Rights

• Article 14 – Equality before law and equal protection of laws.
• Article 15 – Prohibition of discrimination on specified grounds and enables special provisions for disadvantaged groups.
• Article 16 – Equality of opportunity in public employment and provisions for reservation.
• Article 17 – Abolition of untouchability.
• Article 21 – Protection of life and personal liberty, including the broader principle of dignity.

Directive Principles

• Article 46 directs the State to promote the educational and economic interests of weaker sections, particularly Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and protect them from social injustice and exploitation.

Major Laws and Measures

---

India has enacted several measures to address discrimination and exclusion,

• Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
• Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
• Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013
• Constitutional reservations for SCs and STs
• Various welfare and affirmative-action programmes.

The challenge therefore lies less in the absence of legal provisions and more in their effective implementation, enforcement, and monitoring.

Way Forward and Conclusion

---

India needs to move beyond legal provisions towards effective implementation and institutional accountability. Going forward, the government should focus on strengthening the NHRC, enforcing laws against caste discrimination, manual scavenging and hate speech, improving Census, NCRB and disaggregated data, and ensuring transparency in electoral roll revisions.

Civil society should also be allowed to function freely within a lawful framework. Ultimately, bridging the gap between constitutional guarantees and ground realities is essential to uphold equality, dignity and social justice for all.

UPSC Prelims and Mains Practice Question

---

With reference to discrimination and constitutional safeguards in India, consider the following statements:

1. Article 17 of the Constitution abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form.
2. Article 46 directs the State to promote the educational and economic interests of weaker sections, particularly Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
3. The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 deals with the enforcement of constitutional provisions relating to untouchability.
4. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 provides safeguards against atrocities committed against members of SCs and STs.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1, 2 and 3 only
(c) 2, 3 and 4 only
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer: (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Mains Practice Question

Q. India possesses a comprehensive constitutional and legal framework against caste and identity-based discrimination, yet implementation gaps continue to undermine substantive equality. Discuss. (250 words)

---

Right To Work In India

Source: The Hindu
GS II: Government Policies and Interventions, GS III: Employment, Inclusive Growth

---

Why in the News?

A recent Supreme Court hearing on rural employment guarantee programmes raised an important constitutional question: whether the Right to Work should receive protection comparable to the fundamental Right to Life under Article 21.

News in Brief

---

• The debate has gained significance following the replacement of MGNREGA by the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar & Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) [VB-GRAM G] Act, which came into effect from July 2026.
• Employment under the new framework reportedly fell sharply in July–August 2026 compared with the preceding five-year average
• Also, introduces concerns regarding funding limits, wage determination, exclusion of areas and greater fiscal burden on States.

Key Constitutional Provisions Related to the Right to Work

---

Article 41 – Right to Work

• Article 41 reflects the Constitution’s vision of a welfare state by directing the government to make effective provisions for the right to work, right to education, and public assistance in situations such as unemployment, old age, sickness, and disability.
• However, this obligation depends on the State’s economic capacity and level of development, making it a Directive Principle rather than a legally enforceable Fundamental Right.

Article 39 – Right to Livelihood and Fair Economic Justice

• Article 39 lays down the principles that guide the State in ensuring economic justice.
• It calls for adequate means of livelihood for all citizens, promotes equal pay for equal work for both men and women, and seeks the equitable distribution of material resources so that they benefit the larger public.

Article 42 – Humane Working Conditions

• Article 42 directs the State to create just and humane conditions of work.
• It also mandates maternity relief, recognizing the need to protect the health, dignity, and welfare of women in the workplace.

Article 43 – Living Wage and Decent Standard of Life

• Article 43 goes beyond providing employment and emphasizes the quality of work and livelihood.
• It directs the State to ensure a living wage, decent working conditions, and opportunities for workers to enjoy a dignified standard of life along with social and cultural well-being.

Together, Articles 39, 41, 42, and 43 form the constitutional foundation of India’s labour welfare framework and guide policies such as MGNREGA, minimum wage laws, social security measures, and employment guarantee programmes.

Right to Work: Fundamental Right or DPSP?

---

The question of whether the Right to Work should be a Fundamental Right was debated in the Constituent Assembly.

• K.T. Shah favored making it a Fundamental Right, which would place a direct obligation on the State.
• B.R. Ambedkar recognized the practical difficulty of guaranteeing employment to everyone immediately, given India’s economic conditions.
• The Constitution therefore adopted a progressive and aspirational approach and  placed the Right to Work under Article 41, as a Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP) rather than a Fundamental Right.
• This allows the State to work towards universal employment progressively, according to its economic capacity and development.

From Constitutional Approach to Statutory Right

---

• Olga Tellis Case, 1985- The Supreme Court held that the right to livelihood is part of the Right to Life under Article 21, giving greater constitutional importance to livelihood.
• MGNREGA, 2005- MGNREGA gave a statutory basis to the right-to-work principle by providing:
  • 100 days of guaranteed wage employment per rural household.
  • Demand-driven employment for adults willing to do unskilled manual work.
  • Unemployment allowance if work is not provided.
  • Social audits and Gram Panchayat participation.
  • Timely wage payment provisions.
• Significance- It changed rural employment from a welfare approach to a rights-based approach, making employment a legal entitlement.

Major Concerns Under the New VB-GRAM G Framework

---

• Funding- Moving away from a fully demand-driven model and introducing funding limits may affect the availability of guaranteed employment.
• Wages- Concerns remain over wages being insufficient in relation to minimum and living wage standards.
• State finances- A higher financial burden on States could strain already limited fiscal resources.
• Exclusion- Provision to exclude or denotify certain areas may weaken the universal nature of the employment guarantee.
• Employment decline- The article points to a significant fall in rural employment under the new framework.

Minimum Wages and Right to Work

---

• In Sanjit Roy v. State of Rajasthan (1983), the Supreme Court held that paying less than the minimum wage can amount to forced labour under Article 23.
• Thus, an employment guarantee must ensure not only access to work but also fair wages.

Doctrine of Non-Retrogression

---

• The doctrine of non-retrogression raises the question of whether the State can reduce existing social and economic protections after they have been progressively established.
• In the context of employment guarantees, any dilution of existing rights must be examined against principles of social justice, equality, dignity and the welfare state.
• The issue highlights the balance between State resources and progressive realisation of socio-economic rights.

Challenges to the Right-to-Work Framework

---

• Workers may not receive adequate wages on time.
• Limited funds can reduce the availability of employment.
• Rural wage growth may not keep pace with rising living costs.
• Employment programmes may not provide sufficient work to meet demand.
• Poor monitoring can lead to leakages and weak accountability.
• Higher State contributions can strain State finances.
• Vulnerable regions and workers may be left out of employment support.
• A large informal workforce continues to face insecure and unpaid employment.

Way Forward and Conclusion

---

India needs to strengthen the right to work by ensuring adequate and timely wages, predictable funding and effective social audits, while reducing the financial burden on States. Employment programmes should focus on creating durable rural assets, improving skills and generating productive employment rather than providing only short-term relief.

At the same time, vulnerable workers and regions must not be excluded from employment support. A strong rural employment framework can therefore serve both as a social safety net and a means of promoting rural demand, dignity of work and inclusive growth.

UPSC Prelims and Mains Practice Question

---

Consider the following statements regarding the Right to Work in India:

1. Article 41 of the Constitution recognises the Right to Work as a Fundamental Right.
2. The Supreme Court has recognised the right to livelihood as being connected with Article 21.
3. MGNREGA sought to convert the constitutional commitment to the Right to Work into a statutory entitlement.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

a) 1 and 2 only

b) 2 and 3 only

c) 1 and 3 only

d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only

Mains Practice Question

Q) A welfare state is not merely one that provides relief, but one that creates conditions for dignified livelihood. (Essay)

---

Right To Work In India

Source: The Hindu
GS II: Government Policies and Interventions, GS III: Employment, Inclusive Growth

---

Why in the News?

A recent Supreme Court hearing on rural employment guarantee programmes raised an important constitutional question: whether the Right to Work should receive protection comparable to the fundamental Right to Life under Article 21.

News in Brief

---

• The debate has gained significance following the replacement of MGNREGA by the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar & Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) [VB-GRAM G] Act, which came into effect from July 2026.
• Employment under the new framework reportedly fell sharply in July–August 2026 compared with the preceding five-year average
• Also, introduces concerns regarding funding limits, wage determination, exclusion of areas and greater fiscal burden on States.

Key Constitutional Provisions Related to the Right to Work

---

Article 41 – Right to Work

• Article 41 reflects the Constitution’s vision of a welfare state by directing the government to make effective provisions for the right to work, right to education, and public assistance in situations such as unemployment, old age, sickness, and disability.
• However, this obligation depends on the State’s economic capacity and level of development, making it a Directive Principle rather than a legally enforceable Fundamental Right.

Article 39 – Right to Livelihood and Fair Economic Justice

• Article 39 lays down the principles that guide the State in ensuring economic justice.
• It calls for adequate means of livelihood for all citizens, promotes equal pay for equal work for both men and women, and seeks the equitable distribution of material resources so that they benefit the larger public.

Article 42 – Humane Working Conditions

• Article 42 directs the State to create just and humane conditions of work.
• It also mandates maternity relief, recognizing the need to protect the health, dignity, and welfare of women in the workplace.

Article 43 – Living Wage and Decent Standard of Life

• Article 43 goes beyond providing employment and emphasizes the quality of work and livelihood.
• It directs the State to ensure a living wage, decent working conditions, and opportunities for workers to enjoy a dignified standard of life along with social and cultural well-being.

Together, Articles 39, 41, 42, and 43 form the constitutional foundation of India’s labour welfare framework and guide policies such as MGNREGA, minimum wage laws, social security measures, and employment guarantee programmes.

Right to Work: Fundamental Right or DPSP?

---

The question of whether the Right to Work should be a Fundamental Right was debated in the Constituent Assembly.

• K.T. Shah favored making it a Fundamental Right, which would place a direct obligation on the State.
• B.R. Ambedkar recognized the practical difficulty of guaranteeing employment to everyone immediately, given India’s economic conditions.
• The Constitution therefore adopted a progressive and aspirational approach and  placed the Right to Work under Article 41, as a Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP) rather than a Fundamental Right.
• This allows the State to work towards universal employment progressively, according to its economic capacity and development.

From Constitutional Approach to Statutory Right

---

• Olga Tellis Case, 1985- The Supreme Court held that the right to livelihood is part of the Right to Life under Article 21, giving greater constitutional importance to livelihood.
• MGNREGA, 2005- MGNREGA gave a statutory basis to the right-to-work principle by providing:
  • 100 days of guaranteed wage employment per rural household.
  • Demand-driven employment for adults willing to do unskilled manual work.
  • Unemployment allowance if work is not provided.
  • Social audits and Gram Panchayat participation.
  • Timely wage payment provisions.
• Significance- It changed rural employment from a welfare approach to a rights-based approach, making employment a legal entitlement.

Major Concerns Under the New VB-GRAM G Framework

---

• Funding- Moving away from a fully demand-driven model and introducing funding limits may affect the availability of guaranteed employment.
• Wages- Concerns remain over wages being insufficient in relation to minimum and living wage standards.
• State finances- A higher financial burden on States could strain already limited fiscal resources.
• Exclusion- Provision to exclude or denotify certain areas may weaken the universal nature of the employment guarantee.
• Employment decline- The article points to a significant fall in rural employment under the new framework.

Minimum Wages and Right to Work

---

• In Sanjit Roy v. State of Rajasthan (1983), the Supreme Court held that paying less than the minimum wage can amount to forced labour under Article 23.
• Thus, an employment guarantee must ensure not only access to work but also fair wages.

Doctrine of Non-Retrogression

---

• The doctrine of non-retrogression raises the question of whether the State can reduce existing social and economic protections after they have been progressively established.
• In the context of employment guarantees, any dilution of existing rights must be examined against principles of social justice, equality, dignity and the welfare state.
• The issue highlights the balance between State resources and progressive realisation of socio-economic rights.

Challenges to the Right-to-Work Framework

---

• Workers may not receive adequate wages on time.
• Limited funds can reduce the availability of employment.
• Rural wage growth may not keep pace with rising living costs.
• Employment programmes may not provide sufficient work to meet demand.
• Poor monitoring can lead to leakages and weak accountability.
• Higher State contributions can strain State finances.
• Vulnerable regions and workers may be left out of employment support.
• A large informal workforce continues to face insecure and unpaid employment.

Way Forward and Conclusion

---

India needs to strengthen the right to work by ensuring adequate and timely wages, predictable funding and effective social audits, while reducing the financial burden on States. Employment programmes should focus on creating durable rural assets, improving skills and generating productive employment rather than providing only short-term relief.

At the same time, vulnerable workers and regions must not be excluded from employment support. A strong rural employment framework can therefore serve both as a social safety net and a means of promoting rural demand, dignity of work and inclusive growth.

UPSC Prelims and Mains Practice Question

---

Consider the following statements regarding the Right to Work in India:

1. Article 41 of the Constitution recognises the Right to Work as a Fundamental Right.
2. The Supreme Court has recognised the right to livelihood as being connected with Article 21.
3. MGNREGA sought to convert the constitutional commitment to the Right to Work into a statutory entitlement.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

a) 1 and 2 only

b) 2 and 3 only

c) 1 and 3 only

d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only

Mains Practice Question

Q) A welfare state is not merely one that provides relief, but one that creates conditions for dignified livelihood. (Essay)

---

Daily Current Affairs: Click Here

Rate this Article and Leave Feedback