scorecardresearch
Friday, Mar 29, 2024
Advertisement
Premium

Need committee to look at freebies issue, suggest measures: Supreme Court

“We direct all the parties to make their suggestions about the composition of such a body and make recommendations,” a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India N V Ramana said in its order.

political freebies, Supreme Court, Election Commission, indian express, Narendra ModiThe CJI said that various aspects will have to be looked into before taking any final decision on the matter. (Express photo by Amit Mehra/File)

With the Centre in favour of an end to freebies by political parties using public money to lure voters, the Supreme Court Wednesday sought suggestions from petitioners and respondents, in a plea seeking directions against freebies, on the composition of a committee which can go into the issue “dispassionately” and make recommendations.

The bench of Chief Justice of India N V Ramana and Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli said, “After hearing the counsel, the considered opinion of the court is that… all the stakeholders, the beneficiaries and the people who are opposing these freebies, and in addition to that the government as well as organisations like Niti Aayog, Finance Commission, RBI and Opposition parties… have to be involved in the process of making some brainstorming and come to some conclusions on these issues. So, we direct all the parties to make their suggestions about the composition of such a body and make recommendations.”

It asked the two sides to submit their suggestions in a week.

Advertisement

During the hearing, the CJI said the reality is that “no political party will allow to take out these freebies. All want this. That’s the reality”.

Appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that such “populist announcements… distort the informed decision-making of the voter. They don’t know what’s going to fall on them. This is the way we are heading towards economic disaster”.

Festive offer

At the outset, the CJI said it is not only the rich who should get benefits but the poor too and said the question is to what extent can it be checked.

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay who is the petitioner, responded “from whose pocket it will come to go to whose pocket” will have to be considered so that the voter will know.

Advertisement

“(Given to) my left pocket, and after a few years, taken from my right pocket. That’s the long and short… I am a poor person. I am the beneficiary. I would be happy that I am getting something in my left pocket, not knowing that it will be taken out from my right pocket after a few years,” Mehta weighed in.

The CJI said various aspects will have to be looked into before taking any final decision on the matter.

Singh said the Election Commission could look at having a model election manifesto which says “there is no harm in what you are offering, but where you are getting it from… If it declares this is the debt of the state, this debt I will take care. And this is the money I am getting from this source and I will pay to these people”.

CJI Ramana, however, expressed doubts on the effectiveness of such a model manifesto and said there were such proposals in the past for model manifestoes against criminal antecedents of candidates etc. “These are all empty formalities,” he said.

Advertisement

Mehta said there can be a model code and the ECI can definitely apply its mind.

But the CJI did not seem to agree and said the model code will only come into effect during elections: “Mr Mehta, when will the model code come into play? It will come into play just before elections. All the four years you do certain things and (in the) last year, model code of conduct!”

Mehta said it can be a time-bound thing and can come into force immediately.

To Singh’s contention that all such promises are election related, the CJI said the court is not viewing it only from that angle, but “other issues” will also have to be looked into. He said the court was looking at it from the perspective of the country’s economy.

“We are heading towards a disaster,” Mehta said.

Advertisement

The CJI said, “I am a little concerned about these issues… The Election Commission and government can’t say we don’t want to do. Let some people who are concerned with these matters, who can look into the pros and cons dispassionately, make a suggestion and then we can take a call… We can ask them to give a report within a time-bound manner. The ECI can call all stakeholders and take a call.”

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, however, opposed leaving it to the ECI, saying it had become the “Most Favoured Institution” in the country. “Please keep the ECI away from this. This is an economic issue… These are also issues of mid-day meal schemes. These are also freebies. There is free electricity for the poor. All kinds of very important schemes will pass muster. But there are some schemes which cannot pass muster. So it is a political issue and an economic issue. Don’t make it an election issue, because then you politicise the whole thing… Don’t even please refer it to the ECI,” he said.

Also Read in Opinion | From freebies to welfare

Mehta countered Sibal’s contention and said “I would not like to undermine the sanctity of ECI.”

Sibal said, “First there should be a debate in Parliament and Parliament should evolve something… And the Finance Commission should make suggestions which have to be accepted by the government.”

Advertisement

The CJI, however, said, “Do you think Parliament will debate this issue at all?… Which political party will agree?… No political party… will allow to take out these freebies. The reason is everybody wants these freebies. This is the reality. I am not commenting (on) the political parties’ wisdom. But ultimately, what the taxpayer or common man thinks is important.”

Newsletter | Click to get the day’s best explainers in your inbox

He said these are all policy matters and there are limits to the extent courts can go to. “That’s why we say… let everyone participate in the debate.” He said various authorities can interact with different stakeholders, make recommendations to the government and ECI which can be implemented and a compliance report given to the court.

Mehta said the “suggestion given” by Sibal “is a recipe for not solving the problem”.

Advertisement

The CJI said “we are not going to have a lengthy debate in this court to put guidelines… It is a matter of importance where different stakeholders have to be involved and their opinions have to be considered before taking any decision. Ultimately, it is the ECI and the government which have to implement these suggestions.” He asked the parties to come up with the proposal on the composition of a committee that can go into the issue.

Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More

First uploaded on: 03-08-2022 at 16:01 IST
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
close