The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre why it does not form an expert panel to discuss poll freebies. Hearing a public interest petition filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking a ban on freebies that political parties promise in run-up to elections, the apex court also asked why the Central government is not calling an all-party meeting to debate the issue threadbare.
“Why the Centre is not calling an all-party meeting to deliberate on the issue,” Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramanna asked Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta. The Solicitor General said that the matter is before the Court and the Government is ready to provide any kind of help the Court needs on the issue.
Pleading on behalf the Central government, Mehta observed that now it was time to decide who can take a look at the issue and define a framework for the committee to deliberate on freebies.
The CJI, in turn, asked who will head the committee and it has a vast canvas. Ultimately, it is political parties who make such promises not individuals. For example, if he fought elections, he would not be able to get even 10 votes because in the present electoral system a political party is important. Throwing the ball in the Centre’s court, Ramanna asked, “Why the Central government does not form an expert panel to discuss the issue.”
Mehta assured the apex court that the Central government was ready to provide help on all aspects of the issue to the top court.
“But there should be a defining line between freebies and welfare schemes, and this line can be drawn by the Election Commission or the government or the Court, so that candidates should know how far they can go on making poll promises,” Mehta said.
At this juncture of the debate in the Court, Ramanna observed that ultimately the onus to run the economy is on the government. So, the Central government should take initiative to formulate rules and guidelines.
However, Mehta rejected the idea and said, “When the announcement of freebies is being linked to Fundamental Rights or, in other words, freedom of expression, it will not be right for the government to enact a law, rules or guidelines thereof.”
Pleading against the freebies in the course of hearing, Mehta also observed that there are such political parties who are not in power in any state, yet they make all sorts of poll promises without knowing how they would fulfil them if they are voted to power.
Advocate Arvind Datar said, “If there is anything in the manifesto of a party it can be considered freebies. There is enough material to estimate the impact of freebies on economy.”
CJI Ramanna also asked if universal healthcare, access to drinking water, and access to consumer electronics could be treated as freebies. What will happen if there is a petition on welfare schemes as well? Wondered the CJI.
Court Amicus Kapil Sibal was also present during the hearing who observed that such poll freebies adversely impact the economy as they are seldom made after taking economic situation into account.