The recent United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) Special 301 Report indicates that India, alongside China and six other countries, is placed on a 'priority watch list' due to inadequate intellectual property (IP) protection. The report emphasizes ongoing challenges in IP rights protection in India, which have been persistent despite some sporadic improvements in awareness and public discourse around IP.
Key findings from the USTR report include:
- India is categorized as one of the world’s most challenging economies for the enforcement of IP rights.
- Despite efforts to strengthen IP regulations, substantial issues remain unresolved from previous Special 301 Reports.
- The report highlights a significant imbalance in the patent landscape, noting a rising trend where foreign entities are granted approximately 74.46% of patents in India as of 2022.
- For comparison, China's share of foreign patent grants stands at only 12.87%, indicating a more balanced approach towards domestic and foreign patent applicants in that economy.
- India’s investment in Research and Development (R&D) as a percentage of GDP is notably low, recorded at 0.65% in 2022, down from 0.83% in 2008 and far below the global average of 2.62%. This might indicate a growing dependency on foreign technologies and patents.
Significant challenges faced by Indian enterprises include:
- Insufficient legal frameworks to protect trade secrets, with no civil or criminal laws addressing trade secret protection explicitly in India.
- The USTR pointed out the lack of effective civil remedies and deterrent measures against trade secret misappropriation.
- There is a particular concern regarding the mandatory disclosure of source codes necessary for telecom equipment certification, which could jeopardize trade secrets.
Despite claims by India to adjust IP protections to enhance technology access, high customs duties on IP-intensive products such as medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and ICT products are still a concern. Moreover, stakeholders raise issues about the effectiveness of systems protecting proprietary data used for marketing approvals in the pharmaceutical and agricultural sectors.
The report also focused on restrictions within India's pharmaceutical sector, including Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act, which limits patent eligibility, thus affecting stakeholders' confidence in early resolution mechanisms for potential patent disputes.
Overall, the USTR's report underscores a critical need for India to enhance its IP protection mechanisms to foster innovation and safeguard domestic enterprises against foreign competition.
Important Points:
- USTR ranked India as one of the most challenging major economies regarding IP rights enforcement.
- India's R&D expenditure, at 0.65% of GDP, is substantially lower than many major economies.
- The share of patents granted to foreign entities in India has surged to 74.46%.
- Concerns persist regarding the legal frameworks for protecting trade secrets, particularly in the context of telecom certifications.
- Despite explaining the rationale behind limited IP protections, India continues to impose high customs duties on technology-intensive imports.
- The pharmaceutical sector faces scrutiny over its mechanism for resolving patent disputes and eligibility limitations under current legislation.

The recent United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) Special 301 Report indicates that India, alongside China and six other countries, is placed on a 'priority watch list' due to inadequate intellectual property (IP) protection. The report emphasizes ongoing challenges in IP rights protection in India, which have been persistent despite some sporadic improvements in awareness and public discourse around IP.
Key findings from the USTR report include:
- India is categorized as one of the world’s most challenging economies for the enforcement of IP rights.
- Despite efforts to strengthen IP regulations, substantial issues remain unresolved from previous Special 301 Reports.
- The report highlights a significant imbalance in the patent landscape, noting a rising trend where foreign entities are granted approximately 74.46% of patents in India as of 2022.
- For comparison, China's share of foreign patent grants stands at only 12.87%, indicating a more balanced approach towards domestic and foreign patent applicants in that economy.
- India’s investment in Research and Development (R&D) as a percentage of GDP is notably low, recorded at 0.65% in 2022, down from 0.83% in 2008 and far below the global average of 2.62%. This might indicate a growing dependency on foreign technologies and patents.
Significant challenges faced by Indian enterprises include:
- Insufficient legal frameworks to protect trade secrets, with no civil or criminal laws addressing trade secret protection explicitly in India.
- The USTR pointed out the lack of effective civil remedies and deterrent measures against trade secret misappropriation.
- There is a particular concern regarding the mandatory disclosure of source codes necessary for telecom equipment certification, which could jeopardize trade secrets.
Despite claims by India to adjust IP protections to enhance technology access, high customs duties on IP-intensive products such as medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and ICT products are still a concern. Moreover, stakeholders raise issues about the effectiveness of systems protecting proprietary data used for marketing approvals in the pharmaceutical and agricultural sectors.
The report also focused on restrictions within India's pharmaceutical sector, including Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act, which limits patent eligibility, thus affecting stakeholders' confidence in early resolution mechanisms for potential patent disputes.
Overall, the USTR's report underscores a critical need for India to enhance its IP protection mechanisms to foster innovation and safeguard domestic enterprises against foreign competition.
Important Points:
- USTR ranked India as one of the most challenging major economies regarding IP rights enforcement.
- India's R&D expenditure, at 0.65% of GDP, is substantially lower than many major economies.
- The share of patents granted to foreign entities in India has surged to 74.46%.
- Concerns persist regarding the legal frameworks for protecting trade secrets, particularly in the context of telecom certifications.
- Despite explaining the rationale behind limited IP protections, India continues to impose high customs duties on technology-intensive imports.
- The pharmaceutical sector faces scrutiny over its mechanism for resolving patent disputes and eligibility limitations under current legislation.

India Signs Rafale-M Deal with France
India has finalized a significant deal with France valued at ₹63,000 crore to acquire 26 Rafale-Marine (Rafale-M) fighter jets for its Navy. This agreement includes 22 single-seater jets designed for operation from aircraft carriers, alongside four twin-seater trainer jets that are not suitable for carrier deployment. Delivery of these jets is set to commence between 2028 and 2029, concluding by 2030, according to the Navy's announcement.
Summary
- New Acquisition: India has signed a deal to procure 26 Rafale-Marine fighter jets from France.
- Deal Value: The total value of the deal is approximately ₹63,000 crore.
- Jet Specifications:
- The order consists of 22 single-seater jets for carrier operations and four twin-seater trainer jets.
- Delivery is expected to start in 2028-29 and be completed by 2030.
Features of the Rafale
- Manufacturer: The Rafale is a twin-engine omnirole fighter manufactured by Dassault Aviation.
- Mission Capabilities: It excels in varied roles such as air defense, reconnaissance, nuclear deterrence, precision strikes, close air support, anti-ship actions, and fuel transfer.
- Versatility: Unlike many fighter jets, the Rafale can accomplish multiple missions within a single flight, earning it the comparison to a “Swiss Army Knife."
- Technology Level: Although not a fifth-generation stealth aircraft, it employs various features to minimize its radar signature, categorizing it as a 4.5 generation fighter aircraft.
Design Differences for Carrier Operations
- Rafale-M Adaptations: The Rafale-M is specifically engineered for carrier operations, showing significant commonality with the existing Rafale aircraft used by the Indian Air Force, a crucial factor for the Navy's selection.
Takeoff and Landing Mechanics
- Takeoff: Carrier-based aircraft require special adaptations for takeoff due to the limited space on naval vessels. The Indian Navy's use of ski-jumps aids in achieving the necessary angle for flight.
- Landing: The landing process on a carrier differs markedly from land-based operations, employing tailhooks that engage arresting wires on the carrier’s deck to halt the aircraft quickly. This unique landing method subjects the airframe to considerable stress, necessitating reinforced structures.
Additional Features of Carrier Aircraft
Corrosion Resistance: Carrier-based jets have enhanced protection against corrosion due to exposure to seawater and coastal conditions.
Operational Compatibility: Specific sensors and armaments are added to these aircraft for anti-ship missions and to facilitate marine operations.
Service History: The Rafale-M has been operational since 2004 with the French Navy aboard the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier, highlighting the aircraft's proven capability.
Key Takeaways
- This deal marks a substantial enhancement of India's maritime air power, specifically tailored for carrier-based operations.
- The Rafale-M will follow a tailored design to meet the demanding conditions of aircraft carrier flights, ensuring operational efficiency and effectiveness.
- The acquisition reflects a strategic move by India to bolster its defense capabilities amid rising regional security concerns.
In summary, India's acquisition of the Rafale-M jets signifies a major investment in enhancing naval aviation capacity, with the aircraft's multi-role capabilities, reinforced designs for carrier operations, and proven track record standing out as key elements of this deal.
National and international importance

India Signs Rafale Fighter Deal
On Monday, India and France officially signed a $7.4 billion (around Rs 63,000 crore) government-to-government agreement for the procurement of 26 Rafale Marine (Rafale M) fighter jets, intended for the Indian Navy. This addition follows the induction of 36 Rafale aircraft into the Indian Air Force, commencing from 2021.
Importance of Rafale M for the Indian Navy
Naval Aviation: Defined as the military use of air power by naval forces, it involves operations of aircraft from warships like aircraft carriers and other combat vessels. This type of aviation supports naval operations through specialized aircraft for air-to-air combat, maritime reconnaissance, and logistical support, among other roles.
Key Roles of Naval Aviation:
- Fleet Air Defence: Offers air cover for naval forces, extending beyond the range of land-based aircraft.
- Strategic Power Projection: Facilitates the deployment of air power without reliance on land bases.
- Anti-Surface Warfare: Capable of attacking enemy vessels using air-launched missiles.
- Supporting Amphibious Warfare: Assists in marine landings and inland operations.
- Mine Countermeasures: Detects and clears enemy mines using aircraft.
Aircraft Carriers: These are vital warships serving as mobile airbases, allowing naval forces to project air power over long distances without needing land facilities. They play a central role in modern naval warfare, providing strategic advantages in deterrence and sea command.
History of Carrier Aviation in India
India celebrates the 72nd anniversary of naval aviation in May 2025, with its carrier aviation having begun with INS Vikrant in 1961. Over the years, India has operated several aircraft carriers, including the INS Vikrant, INS Viraat, INS Vikramaditya, and the newly commissioned INS Vikrant (2022).
Strategic Need for Aircraft Carriers: India's aircraft carriers serve multiple purposes:
- Strategic Deterrence and Power Projection: Helps India maintain balance and influence in the critical Indian Ocean region.
- Protection of Maritime Interests: Secures trade routes and island territories, contributing to national security.
- Blue Water Navy Capability: Enables operations far from Indian shores for effective crisis response.
- Continuous Operational Readiness: Ensures at least one carrier is operational at all times.
- Non-Military Roles: Carriers also contribute to humanitarian efforts and disaster relief, enhancing India’s regional standing.
Contribution of Rafale M Jets to the Navy
The induction of the 26 Rafale M jets will strengthen the Indian Navy's air capabilities, enhancing the existing fleet of MiG29Ks and bridging a crucial gap as India transitions to fifth-generation capabilities with the development of the Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF).
Interoperability and Maintenance: The Rafale M's commonality with the IAF's Rafale aircraft offers benefits in terms of joint training opportunities and streamlined maintenance practices, which can bolster overall operational efficiency between the two services.
Conclusion
The agreement to procure Rafale M fighter jets marks a significant development for the Indian Navy, enhancing its combat capabilities and contributing to India's strategic objectives in regional security and maritime dominance.
Key Points:
- India and France signed a $7.4 billion contract for 26 Rafale M jets for the Indian Navy.
- Naval aviation supports military air power from warships and is crucial for various roles.
- Aircraft carriers are essential for strategic power projection and maritime security.
- India's naval aviation history began in 1961 with INS Vikrant, operating multiple aircraft carriers since.
- Aircraft carriers enable strategic deterrence and protection of maritime interests.
- Rafale M jets will enhance the Navy’s air capabilities and ensure interoperability with the IAF’s Rafales.
- The deal signifies an important boost to India’s military modernization efforts.
National and international importance

NIA Takes Over Pahalgam Terror Attack Investigation
The article discusses the recent actions taken by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) regarding the Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 individuals lost their lives. The investigation has shifted to the NIA following directives from the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, highlighting the agency's role and jurisdiction in handling terrorism-related cases in India.
Summary:
NIA's Role in Investigation:
- The NIA has initiated its investigation into the Pahalgam terror attack that occurred last week, resulting in 26 fatalities.
- The oversight is being conducted by senior officials including a Deputy Inspector General (DIG), an Inspector General (IG), and a Superintendent of Police (SP) from within the NIA.
- Current efforts focus on interviewing eyewitnesses and collecting evidence related to the incident.
Background of the NIA:
- Established in 2008 after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, the NIA was created to provide a specialized centralized body to investigate cases pertaining to terror and prevent complexities arising from inter-State and international terrorism links.
- Unlike the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which primarily deals with corruption and serious organized crimes, the NIA specifically handles offenses that threaten India’s sovereignty and security.
Jurisdiction and Powers of the NIA:
- The NIA operates under the NIA Act, which lists various offenses, including those under the Indian Penal Code, Information Technology Act, Arms Act, and Anti-Hijacking Act.
- A Supreme Court ruling in December 2024 expanded the agency's powers, allowing it to investigate connected offenses even if those were committed by individuals not formally accused in the original case.
- The Central government can autonomously direct the NIA to investigate certain cases, and state governments must provide necessary assistance during these investigations.
Legal Framework for NIA Cases:
- NIA cases are presided over by Special Courts designated for handling Scheduled Offences, ensuring that cases are dealt with effectively and expediently.
- As of February 2020, the NIA has reported on 315 cases, with 60 resulting in verdicts due to trials, and 54 leading to convictions.
Current Leadership:
- The NIA is led by Director General Sadanand Vasant Date.
Important Points:
- The NIA is expanding its investigation into a significant terror attack focusing on eyewitness accounts and gathering evidence.
- The agency was formed in response to previous terror incidents, particularly the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and aims to address complex terror-related offenses.
- Its jurisdiction includes a wide array of serious offenses that threaten national integrity and security.
- A recent Supreme Court ruling broadens the NIA's investigative powers concerning connected offenses.
- There are mechanisms in place for state cooperation, and designated Special Courts streamline the trial process for NIA cases.
- Leadership of the NIA is currently held by DG Sadanand Vasant Date, reinforcing the agency's commitment to tackling terrorism in India.
In conclusion, the NIA's involvement in high-profile terror investigations underscores its critical role in India's counter-terrorism efforts, demonstrating a structured approach towards addressing and prosecuting terrorism and related offenses.
Polity and Governance

WHO Finalizes Historic Pandemic Accord
On April 16, 2025, after extensive negotiations among over 190 countries for more than three years, the World Health Organization (WHO) finalized a historic pandemic accord called the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS). This agreement aims to enhance global preparedness for health emergencies, following lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, which revealed significant weaknesses in international health systems.
Key Highlights:
Historical Agreement: The accord was formally adopted in a session at WHO's headquarters in Geneva. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus termed it a significant milestone towards a safer global health landscape.
Urgent Need for Global Action: The ongoing threats posed by infectious diseases like bird flu, mpox, measles, and Ebola hastened the need for a more coordinated international response.
Central Mechanism - PABS: The core of the agreement is the PABS, designed to fast-track the sharing of pathogen data and enhance cooperation among countries and pharmaceutical companies, which is essential for timely vaccine and treatment developments.
Equitable Access Focus: The agreement emphasizes fair access to pandemic-related health products, especially for low- and middle-income countries that faced disparities during the COVID-19 crisis.
Addressing Past Inequities: With wealthier nations having hoarded vaccines and resources during the pandemic, the new framework introduces guidelines to prevent future inequalities in accessing critical health tools.
Technology Transfer Compromise: A contentious issue was technology transfer, with developing countries advocating for obligatory sharing of health technologies, while developed nations emphasized the importance of intellectual property rights. The final agreement allows for "mutually agreed" technology transfers, balancing equity needs with pharmaceutical innovation considerations.
Comprehensive Consensus: The final 32-page document, marked entirely in green, reflects a unanimous consensus among the participating nations, underscoring the collaborative achievements in addressing global health emergencies.
Learning from COVID-19: The COVID-19 pandemic unveiled many gaps, such as inadequate data sharing, unequal access to vaccines, and delayed responses. The accord aims to establish a legally grounded framework to avoid repeating these mistakes.
Emphasis on Equity: The agreement highlights that pandemic preparedness involves more than just medical supplies; it encompasses building a structure for transparency, trust, and timely action among nations.
Capacity Building: Lower-income countries will receive support for strengthening their health infrastructure, essential for effective pandemic response.
Call for Political Will: The successful implementation of the agreement will depend on political commitment from member states to integrate its principles into national policies and establish mechanisms for monitoring and financing compliance.
Industry Concerns: The pharmaceutical industry stresses the need for legal certainty and protection for intellectual property rights to encourage continued investment in high-risk medical research, worrying that poorly designed policies could hinder innovation.
Next Steps: The agreement is set for formal adoption at the upcoming WHO annual assembly. Member states will need to work on national legislation and compliance structures based on the accord.
In summary, the newly finalized WHO pandemic accord marks a significant step toward global collaboration in health crises management and equitable access to resources, while addressing the complexities of technology sharing and industry participation in research and development. However, its successful implementation will require ongoing commitment and cooperation among all member states.
National and international importance