New Delhi, Aug 11 : The Centre on Thursday demanded the Supreme Court to lay down guidelines for the regulation of freebies offered by political parties to entice voters, until the legislature comes up with the mechanism.The issues with the freebies also were recognized by the apex tribunal, which noted that the economy is losing money, as well as the welfare of citizens, both need to be balanced.A bench, headed by Chief Justice N.V.Ramana and comprising Justice Krishna Murari said that irrational freebies are something of concern and that there should be financial discipline.However, they also pointed out that in an area like India where poverty is a major issue and poverty is a major issue, how can poverty be not be addressed.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre He stated: “We are proposing a committee consisting of secretary central government secretary of each state government, a representative of every political party, and a representative of Niti Aayog RBI, Finance Commission, National Taxpayers Association and other.” He added that until the legislature comes in the court can decide to make a ruling.
The Supreme Court did not examine a request to de-recognize parties that make promises to offer freebies.The court also said that the idea of de-recognizing political parties that make promises to offer unjustified freebies during elections was undemocratic.”I would not like to go into the realm of the deregistration of an organization or political party.since it is not a democratic idea.
We are a democratic society in the end,” the Chief Justice declared.
A counsel claimed that the majority of the freebies aren’t an element of the manifesto, but are announced at rallies and in speeches.
The bench said that it is an issue that is serious and added that those who oppose freebies have the right to declare their opinion, as they pay tax and believe that the money should be put towards building infrastructure instead of in the distribution of money.The Chief Justice stated that the expert panel could look into the issue, but it is not able to be involved in drafting legislation.
The Chief Justice said that the question is in what way the court is able to intervene or be involved in the matter? He stressed that it is an issue of serious concern and outlined various schemes launched by the Centre and state governments to ensure the benefit of people.Mehta claimed that freebies can’t be welfare but there are other ways to provide welfare to people.He said that in the present, elections are fought solely because of freebies.”If freebies are deemed to be a benefit for the benefit of the people, it will result in a disaster,” said Mehta.
The petitioner claimed that RBI data indicates that the outstanding debts of the states of March 31, 2021, is an astonishing amount of Rs 59.89,360 crore.Senior lawyer Vikas Singh, who represents the petitioner Ashwini upadhyay, stressed on financial discipline and stated “Where do these funds come from? We’re tax-payers? “.
In reference to the distribution of TVs and gold chains by political parties Senior advocate Arvind Datar stated that there was a ruling by this court that states that giving out freebies is adhering to the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution that must be examined.
The bench observed that financial discipline must be in place and the economy being a victim of the loss of money and the well-being of the population, both must be in balance.
The Chief Justice stated that he is not looking to interfere with areas intended to be used for legislative purposes.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi a lawyer for the Aam Aadmi Party, said there is a mismatch between welfare and freebies and the word “freebies” is used in the wrong way.
After hearing arguments, the highest court set the case for a second hearing on the 17th of August.The court sought input from the parties involved and suggested the establishment of an expert panel study the issues that come up with the irrational use of freebies.
On Wednesday the Election Commission (EC) told the Supreme Court that being a constitutional body, it must be kept out of the group of experts representing a broad range of non-governmental and governmental organizations that was proposed to discuss the question of the legitimacy of freebies offered by political parties to get voters to vote.
In the last hearing in the case the supreme court declared its displeasure with the EC for not taking a position regarding the threat of freebies that political parties offer.
The court of supreme appeal was hearing an PIL from Upadhyay seeking instructions to the Centre and the Election Commission to take steps to regulate the poll manifestos of political parties and to hold them accountable for the promises they make in these manifestos.
ss/uk
