The Inquiry

River systems around the world are under stress from various factors ranging from pollution, to agriculture, to extractive industries. In some parts of the world there are regulations to help protect rivers, but in a lot of cases these are just preventative measures for a system already seriously degraded.
Another way to protect rivers which has been receiving attention is to give them legal rights, like those we associate with being a person. These rights could include the right to flow freely and the right to regenerate. Corporations have long been recognised as legal persons and increasingly this has been extended to environmental entities. There are different pathways to secure legal personhood, from changing a country’s constitution, to changing local law or to implementing a new ruling on an existing law, but as to whether any of these provide protection in practise, often depends on the way humans respond to the river. If a river can have rights and responsibilities, could they in turn face legal action from humans for failing to meet their own legal duties? Should rivers have personhood?
(Photo: A wide view of the Turag River in Dhaka, Bangladesh, lined with small boats in the foreground and a densely populated riverside settlement on the right bank. Homes and market stalls sit on raised wooden structures above the water, while the shoreline shows piles of debris and exposed earth. The water appears dark with scattered floating vegetation, and trees and buildings fade into a hazy background. Credit: Md Manik/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Contributors:
Prof Nick Mount, geographer and river scientist, UK
Dr Erin O’Donnell, author, senior lecturer and ARC research fellow, University of Melbourne Law School, Australia
Pier-Olivier Boudreault, director of conservation for the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, a founding member of the Alliance Muteshekau-shipu, Quebec, Canada
Author and professor Naveeda Khan, Department of Anthropology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
Presenter: William Crawley
Producer: Jill Collins
Researcher: Katie Morgan
Technical producer: Craig Boardman
Production co-ordinator: Phoebe Lomas
Production management assistant: Liam Morrey
Editor: Tom Bigwood

In July 2026, tens of thousands of students took to the streets in India’s capital, demanding reforms to education. The protests followed the leak of medical entrance exam papers but quickly grew to reflect wider concerns about job opportunities for graduates.
The movement became known as the Cockroach Janta Party. What began as an online campaign developed into a youth-led protest movement, attracting prominent activists and drawing international attention.
As the protests grew, they posed a challenge to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the governing Bharatiya Janata Party, which has been in power for more than a decade. The movement has brought together people from different parts of Indian society and highlighted dissatisfaction over job opportunities and prospects for young people. So, how has the Cockroach Janta Party changed India’s politics and what does it mean for its future?
Our expert panel this week include Ruchi Gupta, executive director of the Future of India Foundation, India; Sadanand Dhume, senior fellow for India, Pakistan, and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, US; Rahul Verma, fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, India and Dr Chietigj Bajpaee, senior research fellow for South Asia in the Asia-Pacific Programme at Chatham House, UK.
(Photo: Students celebrate the resignation of India's Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, in Amritsar, 25 July, 2026. Fourteen students all protesting with one arm in the air making peace signs. They are holding multiple placards and an Indian flag. Credit: Narinder Nanu/Getty Images)
Presenter: Tanya Beckett
Producer: Matt Toulson
Researcher: Evie Yabsley
Technical producer: Cameron Ward
Production co-ordinator: Phoebe Lomas
Production management assistant: Liam Morrey
Editor: Tom Bigwood

In September, Morocco’s citizens will go to the polls for the country’s general election. Morocco is a constitutional monarchy, with a multi-party-political system. A new head of government will be appointed by King Mohammed VI, from the winning party, to form a ruling coalition.
But whilst these elections may be seen as an opportunity for Moroccans to shape the next phase of their country’s political landscape, there are concerns about potential voter apathy and wider discontent. Only last year, nationwide protests led by Moroccan youth called for less state spending on infrastructures like the new World Cup stadium and more funding to improve economic opportunities and public services.
Whilst efforts were made to respond to their calls, including proposals to get young people involved in formal politics and increased funding for education and health, there is a sense that there is still little change to people’s daily lives. High unemployment rates and regional inequalities remain as issues. So, is it possible that these elections can restore Moroccans faith in their country?
(Photo: A picturesque view of Rabat, Morocco's capital city. Sunshine with blue skies with a view of Bouregreg River. Credit: Sergio Formoso via Getty Images)
Contributors:
Dr Mohammed Masbah, founder and president, the Moroccan Institute for Policy Analysis, Rabat, Morocco
Merouan Mekouar, full professor of development studies and social sciences, York University, Toronto, Canada
Intissar Fakir, senior fellow, the Middle East Institute, Washington DC, USA
Ahmed Jazouli, author and independent policy expert in governance, democracy and development, Rabat, Morocco
Presenter: Charmaine Cozier
Producer: Jill Collins
Researcher: Evie Yabsley
Technical producer: Richard Hannaford
Production co-ordinator: Phoebe Lomas
Production management assistant: Liam Morrey
Editor: Tom Bigwood

The House of Representatives has voted to make daylight saving time permanent in the United States. If the measure is approved by the Senate and becomes law, most Americans would no longer spring forward in March or fall back in November.
For more than a century, changing the clocks has been used to make better use of daylight, but the practice has long divided opinion. Supporters of the bill argue it boosts productivity and removes the disruption of changing the clocks twice a year. Critics warn that permanent daylight saving time could affect health and road safety as people face darker winter mornings.
Around the world, governments have taken different approaches. Some have scrapped seasonal clock changes altogether, while others continue to observe them. We examine why daylight saving time was introduced and whether the case for changing the clocks still stacks up today. Is daylight saving time working?
Contributors:
David Prerau, author of Seize the Daylight: The Curious and Contentious Story of Daylight Saving Time
Jennifer Evans, professor of biomedical sciences at Marquette University, US
Till Roenneberg, professor of chronobiology at the University of Munich, Germany
Joan Costa-Font, professor of health economics at the London School of Economics, UK
(Photo: The turquoise Art Deco clock tower with white clock hands of the Eastern Columbia Lofts in downtown Los Angeles. Credit: (Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
Presenter: Tanya Beckett
Producer: Matt Toulson
Researcher: Evie Yabsley
Technical producer: Cameron Ward
Production co-ordiantor: Phoebe Lomas
Production management assistant: Liam Morrey
Editor: Tom Bigwood

New Zealand’s government is making big changes to its education system. The aim is to reverse declining student achievement and give more opportunities to disadvantaged children. The subjects of reading, writing, maths and science form the core of the new curriculum. But there are concerns particularly among the Indigenous community that the Māori language, culture and identity have not been considered as an integral part of the reforms. And that in the longer term, a lack of access to Indigenous teaching might have repercussions beyond the classroom, in wider society.
This is not just an issue for New Zealand. Decisions on heritage-based learning are of concern for Indigenous populations across the world. In Canada’s public school system, whilst courses in Indigenous knowledge are not mandatory, there are concerted efforts to include Indigenous perspectives in the curriculum. In the province of Ontario, children from kindergarten age up to the age of 15 to 16, learn about their Indigenous communities. However, it is not the same story everywhere, so is Indigenous education at risk?
To help answer this question are our panel of leading educators: Dr Mere Skerrett, associate professor, school of education, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand; Dame Elizabeth Rata, professor of education and social practice, University of Auckland, New Zealand; Dr Lindsay Morcom, professor and Canada Research Chair in language revitalisation and decolonising education, faculty of education, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada and Dr Liana MacDonald, associate professor of peace studies and co-director of The National Center for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago, New Zealand.
(Photo: Six children sitting on the floor of a classroom with their backs facing the camera listening to their teacher, Auckland, New Zealand. Credit: Fiona Goodall/Getty Images)
Presenter: Charmaine Cozier
Producer: Evie Yabsley and Jill Collins
Researcher: Amelia Cox
Technical producer: Nathaniel Danter
Production co-ordinator: Phoebe Lomas
Production management assistant: Liam Morrey
Editor: Tom Bigwood