In Focus by The Hindu The Hindu

Covid-19 may not be raging any more, but a controversy over the AstraZeneca vaccine, sold as Covishield in India is. The issue first erupted when AstraZeneca, in a submission to a court in the UK, acknowledged that its vaccine could cause a rare, potentially life-threatening condition, known as thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome or TTS. This led to everything from outrage on social media, to political parties issuing statements and to a host of misinformation being circulated. What is significant is that this information about TTS is not new – it was established as early as in 2021, when India’s vaccination programme was underway, and it has been a known fact now for well over three years. Just a short time after the court submission made headlines, AstraZeneca also announced the worldwide withdrawal of its vaccine, citing a decline in the demand. As of this year, India has administered over 1.5 billion doses of Covishield to its eligible population. 
What led to the furore over the vaccine’s rare side effect and what do we know about it? How robust is India’s system to monitor adverse events arising from vaccinations? And what happens to India’s vaccination programme if Covishield is no longer available – are there other options available for those who need them or for future immunisations? 

Guest: Dr Anurag Agrawal, Dean, BioSciences and Health Research, Trivedi School of Biosciences at Ashoka University 
Host: Zubeda Hamid 
Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian. 

In a major embarrassment for India’s human rights image, the National Human Rights Commission has been denied ‘A’ status accreditation for a second year in a row. The Geneva-based, United Nations-linked Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) took the decision to defer it again during a meeting of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) earlier this month.
The NHRC was set up under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, and it had enjoyed ‘A’ Status accreditation since the beginning of the accreditation process in 1999, which it retained in 2006, 2011 and in 2017 also, after a deferment.
So, what are the reasons for the deferment of accreditation for India’s top human rights institution? What are the implications of not possessing this accreditation? And what does India have to do get the accreditation back?

Guest: Henri Tiphagne, Executive Director, People’s Watch, a non-profit that works in the field of human rights.
Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu.
Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

India is seeing a sharp increase in the number of ghost shopping malls, according to a new report from real estate consultancy, Knight Frank India. The report, titled ‘Think India Think Retail 2024’, found that in 2023, there was 13.3 million square feet of ‘ghost shopping infrastructure’ across 29 cities, causing a loss of $798 million.
By definition, a ghost shopping mall is one where the vacancy rate of retail space is above 40%. If we counted only the eight Tier 1 cities, the pan-India vacancy rate across all categories of malls stood at 15.7%. Also, while Tier 1 cities had 271 shopping malls in 2022, the number came down to 263 (77% of total shopping centres) in 2023.
So, what is the reason behind this phenomenon of ghost shopping malls and high vacancy rates? Is it because offline shopping is giving way to online shopping? Is it due to weakening consumer demand? Or are there other industry-specific dynamics at play?

Delhi’s Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has been given interim bail to campaign in the elections. After many hearings, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court granted conditional bail to Kejriwal on the 10th of May.
Describing the elections to the Lok Sabha as the most significant event this year, the bench, facing stiff resistance from the Centre, pointed out that Kejriwal had no criminal antecedents nor was he a threat to society.
What implications does Kejriwal’s release have smack in the middle of the election campaign? Will he impact elections in the seven seats of Delhi or even beyond?

Guest: Javed Ansari, senior journalist and commentator, and former political writer for The Hindu.
Host: Amit Baruah, Senior Associate Editor, The Hindu.
Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

Seven months into Israel’s military assault on Gaza, more than 34,000 Palestinian civilians have been killed, more than 78,000 wounded, and northern Gaza is facing a “full-blown famine” according to the UN. Earlier this week, there was a slight whiff of optimism in Gaza when Hamas announced that it had accepted a three-phase ceasefire proposal brokered by Qatar and Egypt, and Israel, too, sent a delegation to Cairo to discuss it further.
But in the interim, Israel ordered Rafah to be evacuated, launched aerial strikes on the city, and took control of the border crossing there, which was critical for sending humanitarian aid to Gaza. Meanwhile, President Biden has halted a major shipment of bombs headed for Israel, signalling that US weapons should not be used to target Palestinian civilians.
What exactly was the ceasefire proposal that Hamas accepted but Israel didn’t? Will the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political future survive a ceasefire agreement at this stage of the conflict, when Israel’s self-proclaimed military objective of “destroying Hamas” hasn’t been met? Would the Biden administration’s pausing of the shipment of offensive weapons have any effect on Israel’s military plans going forward?

Guest: Stanly Johny, The Hindu’s International Affairs Editor.
Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu.
Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

The delay by the Election Commission (EC) in sharing the aggregate polling data of the first and second phases of the ongoing Lok Sabha elections has evoked sharp questions from the Opposition and civil society. The EC released the final voter turnout figures for phase 1 after 11 days, and for phase 2 after four days. Moreover, it has only released turnout percentages – 66.14% in Phase 1 and 66.71% in phase 2. It is yet to release the actual numbers of voters who cast their vote.

The Election Commission has also not put out the absolute number of voters in each constituency, raising disturbing questions about the possibility of manipulation at the counting stage. Another issue that has been flagged is the sizeable difference in turnout figures between the close of polling day, and the date of announcement of final voter percentages.

So, what has traditionally been the EC’s practice with regard to sharing of electoral data? How much time is it supposed to take? What kinds of data does it share as a matter of course? And are the concerns about vote manipulation at the counting stage valid or misplaced?

G. Sampath is joined by MG Devasahayam, a former IAS officer who is also Coordinator, Citizens Commission on Elections.