Instructions: –
1. Attempt all the questions.
2. Once you have completed all the questions of a particular section click on the submit button for scores and explanations then move to the next sections.
3. For each correct answer, you receive 1 mark. For this mock, there is no negative marking.
English Language
The COVID-19 pandemic magnified the inequities in public health across the globe. Learning from experiences, policymakers across the world have rightly endorsed the need to improve the global health architecture as a tool to catalyse economic growth and secure the future of the planet. Greater health financing through international collaborations, deepening the adoption of digital health solutions, and increasing access to medical countermeasures are some of the aspects that are key to reducing the global disparity in health and strengthening the global health architecture. However, amidst these crucial strategies, prioritising access to blood and its products remains fundamental to building a resilient global health architecture.
Blood and its various products play a crucial role in a number of medical scenarios, which includes scheduled surgeries, emergency procedures, as well as in the treatment of conditions such as cancer, thalassemia, and postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). This underscores their irreplaceable significance in upholding patient health across a spectrum of health-care needs.
Inequities in access to safe and sustainable blood can be mitigated through the establishment of robust public-private partnerships (PPP). Collaborations between leading industry players hold immense potential in introducing innovative models for blood collection and distribution, effectively addressing numerous existing challenges. The hub and spoke model is one such innovative method where high-volume blood banks act as a hub for smaller blood centres. This model can be particularly relevant for resource-constrained settings in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC) as it can address critical gaps in blood availability and distribution, thereby enhancing the accessibility and availability of blood and its products.
Further, as the shelf life of blood and its products is short, a hub and spoke model would help in optimising their utilisation by the smaller blood centres. This innovative approach streamlines distribution, ensuring that these vital resources reach their maximum potential while reducing losses from expiration. As we leave the COVID-19 pandemic behind us and align the global developmental road map for an equitable and sustainable future, the health paradigm must be prepared accordingly. Along with other modifications in the health paradigm, since blood and its products are central to modern medicine, political leaders and policymakers must continue to take steps to strengthen the blood management ecosystem. Simultaneously, proactive engagement from industry and active participation of the citizenry should also be pivotal aspects of this concerted effort.
Legal Reasoning
In contract law, the principle that contracts which restrain one’s trade are void is well-established. This principle, embodied in Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, serves to protect the freedom of individuals to engage in trade and pursue economic opportunities without undue restriction. According to this provision, any agreement that imposes a constraint on a person’s ability to carry on their trade, profession, or business is considered void.
However, it’s important to note that the restraint must specifically pertain to trade-related activities to trigger the application of Section 27. Contracts that restrict activities unrelated to trade, such as personal hobbies or non-commercial pursuits, do not fall within the purview of this provision and are therefore not automatically void. This distinction ensures that individuals retain the freedom to engage in a wide range of activities outside the realm of trade without encountering legal impediments.
Despite the general rule against contracts restraining trade, there exist certain exceptions where such agreements may be deemed valid. One such exception is the doctrine of solus agreements, wherein parties agree to deal exclusively with each other in a particular trade or business. Solus agreements are permissible under Section 27 if they are entered into for the benefit of all parties involved and do not result in arbitrary losses to any party. This requirement ensures that solus agreements do not unfairly restrict competition or unduly disadvantage any party to the contract.
Additionally, non-compete clauses, which prohibit parties from engaging in competing activities within a specified geographic area and for a certain period of time, may also be upheld if they are deemed reasonable. The reasonableness of such clauses is assessed based on factors such as geographical contiguity, duration, and scope of the restriction. Non-compete clauses that are narrowly tailored to protect legitimate business interests, such as trade secrets or goodwill, are more likely to be considered reasonable and enforceable.
Moreover, trade combinations or agreements among traders or businesses aimed at promoting the common interests of all parties are generally permissible under the law. These agreements may include arrangements for price fixing, production quotas, or market sharing, provided they do not result in anti-competitive behavior or harm to consumers. Trade combinations that seek to enhance efficiency, promote innovation, or achieve economies of scale can contribute positively to the overall welfare of society.
In conclusion, while contracts restraining trade are generally void under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, there exist exceptions and limitations to this rule. Solus agreements and non-compete clauses may be upheld if they meet certain criteria of fairness and reasonableness. Additionally, trade combinations for the benefit of all parties are permissible as long as they do not lead to anti-competitive behavior or harm to consumers. By striking a balance between the protection of individual freedom and the promotion of fair competition, the law seeks to foster an environment conducive to economic growth and innovation.
Logical Reasoning
Domestic cats, known for their predatory prowess, have been documented consuming an astonishing array of over 2000 different species, a number that likely underestimates the true extent of their dietary diversity. This revelation comes from the inaugural comprehensive effort to catalog the dietary habits of domestic cats. The study, spearheaded by Christopher Lepczyk at Auburn University in Alabama, delved into scientific literature to construct a database detailing the various species consumed by cats and their geographical locations.
The database reveals a staggering variety in the feline diet, encompassing 981 bird species, 463 reptile species, and 431 mammal species, including humans. Additionally, it lists 119 insect species, 57 amphibian species, and 33 species from other assorted groups. Among these 2084 species, 347 are classified as either threatened – such as the western quoll, green sea turtle, and Newell’s shearwater – or presumed extinct in the wild, like the Stephens Island wren. However, the study did not delve into the extent of the impact cat predation has had on these species.
Lepczyk emphasizes that these figures merely scratch the surface of the issue. In many instances, particularly with invertebrates like insects, the exact species consumed by cats were not identified. He notes the breadth of the feline diet is remarkably extensive compared to other carnivores or predators, with very few species off-limits to their consumption.
The database also includes species that cats scavenge, explaining the presence of some species too large for cats to typically kill. In certain cases, such as with juvenile green sea turtles, cats actively hunt their prey. The study did not explore potential strategies to mitigate the impact of domestic cats on wildlife populations. However, suggested measures to reduce wildlife casualties include keeping cats indoors or in enclosed gardens, microchipping, and spaying or neutering.
Furthermore, the study highlights the role of domestic cats in spreading the brain-altering parasite responsible for toxoplasmosis to both wildlife and humans. This finding underscores the complex ecological impact of domestic cats, extending beyond direct predation to include disease transmission.
Quantitative Techniques
Directions: Answer the questions based on the information given below.
There are four friends namely Neeraj, Bajrang, Ravi and Rohit. Neeraj, Bajrang and Ravi invested their sum in three different schemes namely ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’, respectively. Compound interest (compounded annually) received by Bajrang at the end of 2 years was Rs. 3520. Rohit took a loan of Rs. ‘x’ from a bank offering a compound interest of R% p.a. compounded annually, at the end of 2007. The interest that he should pay to the bank becomes Rs. 10920 at the end of 2010 and Rs. 29789.76 at the end of 2013. If the amount received at the end of 4 years when Rs. ‘x’ is invested at simple interest of 21.4%, is divided in the ratio of 21:10:27, then we will get the amount of simple interest earned by Neeraj, Bajrang and Ravi at the end of 4.2 years, 3 years and 40.5 years, respectively. When the compound interest (compounded annually) received by Neeraj, Bajrang and Ravi at the end of 2 years is represented in a pie chart then the central angle made by amount of compound interest received by Neeraj and Ravi was 202.5o and 25.5o respectively.
General Knowledge
The Framework Convention by the Council of Europe on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy, and the Rule of Law is a historic step forward in the regulation of artificial intelligence across the world. This is the first treaty in the world that the United States, European Union, and the United Kingdom are about to sign-up on, a legally binding international agreement focused on ensuring that the development and use of AI do not contradict fundamental human rights as well as democratic values and the rule of law. The treaty has come in a time when deep embedding of AI systems into most sectors of governance, society, and industry has raised profound questions regarding ethics and the law as their potential impact may reach high levels.
The treaty wants to avoid disparate national approaches to AI governance. It threatens to hinder the proper progress of technology and creates inconsistency in legal protections. It is important because it takes a holistic approach to regulate AI. Its framework is based on a “risk-based framework”: therefore, AI applications need to be weighed against the risk they pose for human rights and democratic processes. Additional forms of oversight will be applied to the systems under this category which include high-risk AI systems, such as those applying to criminal justice or healthcare decisions and political decision-making processes. The treaty is obviously aimed at both government and private sector actors: each is held accountable for the ethical application of AI. Importantly, it sets up legal protection for human beings and provides them with opportunities to seek redress where AI systems violate their rights. This is precisely when AI technologies are impacting such sensitive areas as employment and law enforcement and public services where the risks of discrimination or breach of privacy are high.
The treaty drew from over 50 countries within a two-year period and reflects a kind of consensus among many nations for coordinated governance in AI. The treaty would set global standards to prevent conflicting national regulations that may ultimately reduce innovation and raise legal uncertainty. These include transparency requirements in AI development, where AI systems explain and make their decision-making processes understandable to the public. Focus on AI technologies for transparency shall contribute much in building public trust, especially on a specific area like automated decision making and algorithmic bias, which has become a growing concern.
Above all, protecting democracy from potential threats of AI is the most important goal the treaty is directed at trying to solve. With the emergent development in fears over election manipulation and public opinion control through the spread of misinformation by AI, the treaty is striving to set out avenues that ensure that the systems of AI are not adopted against democratic processes. It also focuses on accountability and clearly provides pathways for how developers and users of AI are to be held accountable for all the harm that their systems may cause. The treaty is not a full cover on how AI is used, such as national security or research in specific fields; however, it does set a strong foundation for future regulation within those areas.
Although the treaty is legally binding in nature, it does not contain punitive mechanisms, such as fines or penalties, toward ensuring that the treaty is properly enforced. Instead, compliance will be assessed regularly on good faith, and every country is expected to abide by the guidelines of the treaty. Such an approach has come under criticism because of concerns regarding the ability of the treaty to enforce complete accountability, as in many countries, enforcement mechanisms for international agreements may be a bit weakened.