+

AAP moves SC against PIL opposing ‘freebies’

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) on Tuesday moved the top court to intervene in a PIL filed by advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay seeking regulation of ‘freebies’. The plea said, “PIL petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay himself has strong links to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (‘BJP’), having served as its spokesperson and as a leader […]

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) on Tuesday moved the top court to intervene in a PIL filed by advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay seeking regulation of ‘freebies’. The plea said, “PIL petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay himself has strong links to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (‘BJP’), having served as its spokesperson and as a leader of its Delhi unit in the past. The petitioner’s frivolous petitions, instituted in the name of public interest, often inspired by this party’s political agenda, have come under this court’s criticism in the past.”

“The Petitioner herein is attempting to use the device of PIL to camouflage a thinly veiled attempt at furthering a particular political agenda. The lack of bona fide in the petitioner’s actions is only compounded by the fact that the petitioner does not, at any point in the petition, disclose his present or past ties with a particular ruling party, instead introducing himself generically as a “social political activist,” the plea added.

AAP said, “The petition, while referring vaguely to ‘freebies’, clearly seeks judicial action against a particular model of economic development by exclusively targeting fiscal expenditure on socialist and welfarist measures for the masses.”

“The petitioner, despite claiming to be concerned about the fiscal deficit, ignores the vast fiscal losses to the exchequer caused by tax rebates, subsidies, and other such ‘freebies’ routinely provided to big industries and businesses by the Centre and various state governments alike,” the plea added.

The petitioner further said, “The relief or directions sought by the petitioner does not pertain to actual fiscal restraint in governance or the actual prohibition of ‘freebies’. Rather, the relief sought pertains only to prohibiting political parties from promising such policies that may fall within the petitioner’s label of ‘freebies’, or even continuing to implement such existing policies, in the lead up to elections. The petitioner’s concern is evidently and solely with whether such policies may be advertised or promised by parties in their electoral campaigns, not with whether expenditure on such freebies is actually made by a government once elected. Once this is rendered clear, any veneer of concern with fiscal responsibility that the petition seeks to adorn is destroyed, and the petition is revealed as a transparent instance of “political interest litigation.”

“The petitioner also fails to reckon with the freedom of speech guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and subject to only reasonable restrictions that may be justified on grounds of “sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence. Prima facie, any restriction on electoral speech of the kind prayed for by the petitioner is not justified on any of the grounds listed above,” the plea added.

While considering Upadhyay’s petition on 3 August, a bench led by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana remarked that no political party wants freebies to go, even as the Union Government termed such hand-outs the “road to an economic disaster” and urged the Election Commission of India (ECI) to devise ways to deal with them.

On that day, the court also indicated that it may consider setting up a panel, which can go into the issue “dispassionately” and make recommendations to the Centre and ECI, as it sought suggestions from all parties by 11 August.

Tags: