Which Article mentioned about Freedom of press?

1. Should Parliamentary privileges be codified? Discuss.Introductions:[Use Article- 105]
-Parliamentary is the temple of democracy, its sanctity is ensured by the conduct of the members on the floor of the house.
-The purpose of granting privileges is to provide them free and fair chance for speech, and to protect their autonomy in the parliament without any hindrance.

In Favour of Codifying:
-Codification provides proper organizational structure, arbitrariness will reduce
-The concept was borrowed from UKs house of commons; they themselves have codified privileges
-While Britain has parliamentary sovereignty, India is a popular sovereignty where in constitution is supreme.
-Codification defines, clarifies and elucidates the boundaries and restrictions, for the parliamentarians.
-Codification will provide rules and framework which will actually empower parliamentarians to use the current power in a proper channel.
-It will give a moral and ethical stand to parliamentarians while exercising the privileges and leaves no room for blame.

Against codification:
-May to curtailing parliaments power.
-Discretion, rationality and human judgement is needed in some critical instances, codification may not give this scoyale.
-Parliamentarians argue that codification affects sovereignty and supremacy of parliament.

Conclusions:
-The spirit of the constitution is above any organ and its powers. Hence it must be realized.

2. Press freedom in India , what are the issues revolving around it. To what extent the press is regulated in India?

Issues of Press:
-Freedom of press in India is implicitly mentioned in Article 19(1) of Indian constitution. Where as it finds an explicit mention in American Constitution.
-The world press freedom index given by reporters without borders places India at 136th position.
-Adding to this, from 2015-17, there were 140 attacks on rationalists and more than a 100 attacks on journalists
-Press is facing threats of defamation suits, libels and even physical attacks.

Regulation of press
-The fourth estate which is not regulated by any authority but is self regulated. Two important bodies of self regulation- press council of India, news broad casters standards Authority.
-Most of the media houses are owned by non-media houses, cross investment of one media house into another is taking place.
-There are no exclusive media houses and no regulation on number of media houses hence there are huge number of media channels in India vs only 3 in US.
-No regulation to prevent Goebbels publicity.
-It is the constitutional obligation of the government to protect the right of dissemination of views , even if they are dissenting.

3. Relevance of All India Judicial services AIJS
-The Parliament of India under the Article 312 can create an All India service, including All India Judicial service (AIJS). Even the Law Commission in 1950s recommended setting up of AIJS with a view that it would reform subordinate judiciary by bringing in transparency in the recruitment of subordinate judges. Recently, 9 high courts have rejected the proposal to setup AIJS.

Relevance:
-There is prevalence of nepotism and favouritism in the judicial appointments at subordinate level.
-The problems of judicial pendency and vacancies also demand for judicial reforms.
-However, the AIJS does not diagnose the problems that marred the subordinate judiciary. There are almost equal vacancies in the present All India services as they are in the judiciary. The real problem with the subordinate judiciary is that there is no good salary and career progression. Thus, the young law graduates are drifting away to the private sector instead of working in the courts. Other important problems due to

AIJS are:
-The subordinate judiciary deals with local people. Recruits of a national exam will be from various regions and thus would lack the knowledge of local laws and customs of a region.
-Language also acts as a hindrance between the people and the judiciary.
-Article 39A directs the state to ensure that the opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen. The present state of delays and pendencies in the Indian judiciary is going against this constitutional directive. Thus AIJS reform is necessary. The language barrier can be overcome just the way a civil servant of AIS learns local languages and local customs. The issues of career growth should be addressed in the AIJS. Then, AIJS will become attractive for young lawyers and will thus become relevant.

1. Differentiate between Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhai Patel.
-Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhai Patel are two stalwarts of the Indian freedom struggle, who were personal favourites of Mahatma Gandhi. They played an immense role in the politics of post Independent India as well as the Prime Minister and Home Minister respectively. However, there were crucial differences between these two great leaders:

Jawaharlal Nehru
-Nehru was an idealist. The principle of idealism was throughout his foreign policy and in managing politics of the country.
-Nehrus idealism in the integration of states did not give satisfactory outcomes. He was a strict democrat in dealing with the integration of Jammu and Kashmir.

-In religious view, Nehru was an agnostic atheist. He established secular ethos in India.
-Jawaharlal Nehru belonged to an elitist family.
-Nehru enjoyed a pan India acceptance and fame. This was responsible for him becoming the Prime Minister and not Patel.
-Nehru was responsible for Unity in Diversity of India.
-Nehru had greater exposure in international affairs and greater ties with international leaders. He also attended Brussels conference on League against imperialism in 1927.

Sardar Vallabhai Patel
-Patel was a realist. His employment of realism in politics acquired him the title, Iron man of India
-Patels frank diplomacy with no hesitation to use military action helped in effective integration of princely states into India. His efforts in the integration of the state of Hyderabad deserves special mention.
-Patel was a religious person but was an enemy of every fundamentalist.

-Sardar Vallabhai Patel was the man of masses.
-Though well known, Patels fame was limited spatially.

-Patel was responsible for the Integrity of India.
-Patel had limited foreign ties and exposure. This made Jawaharlal Nehru a better option to lead the newly Independent country.

Despite all these differences, it must be noted that It takes both the hands to clap. Both the leaders are responsible in founding the idea of India i.e., secular, plural and democratic.