Need to balance welfare measures & economy’s health: Supreme Court on freebies | India News

NEW DELHI: During Thursday’s hearing in the Supreme Court on poll freebies, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said the court has initiated an important national debate.
The CJI said, “The economy losing money or getting ruined is one issue and, at the same time, welfare measures for the poor… both have to be considered. Both have to be balanced. That is the reason why we initiated the debate. We want an expert panel to put its collective thinking and wisdom into the issue and give a report which can be the basis for the court to take some measures.”
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta handed over the Centre’s suggestion on the composition of the expert committee, which the apex court intends to set up to examine the impact of freebies on the general public, taxpayers and the economy. The court wants the panel to also differentiate between freebies and welfare schemes, which it sees as as essential for sections and categories needing a helping hand.

“So far as welfare schemes are concerned, every government does (implement them) and should do so. Now this freebie culture, distribution of something free, has been elevated to a level of art and sometimes elections are fought by some political parties only on freebies. If it is the understanding of any political section of our country that distributing freebies is the only way of doing welfare for the people, it is a dangerous situation. We are leading the country to disaster,” the SG said.
Indirectly hitting out at the “free electricity” poll promise, the SG said, “Please look at certain stressed sectors. Many electricity generating companies and distribution companies, most of which are government companies, are severely stressed financially… Till the legislature steps in, the SC should lay down guidelines. Till the court has the assistance from the considered view of the committee (to be set up), it may consider issuing certain directions or lay down do’s and don’ts for political parties in the larger national interest. Welfare scheme every responsible government must understand, but distributing everything free and taking it to the level of an art, is not welfare.”

Appearing for petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay, senior advocate Vikas Singh said every political party or candidate announcing freebies must be asked to also explain their plan to mitigate the state’s debt, resources from which the debt is to be addressed and revenue generation sources which would enable them to distribute the freebies. “Otherwise these parties should be deregistered,” he said.
When CJI Ramana said that unless a candidate or a party is elected and forms government, they would not know the financial status of the country and the budgeting measures to be taken, senior advocate Vijay Hansaria provided the debt burden statistics for each state.

Justice Ramana said, “Ultimately, in a country of more than a billion people, the effect and impact of freebies on economy and people has to be studied and debated. A direction for deregistration of parties cannot be given just like that in a democratic country like ours. In the anxiety of doing something, we must not commit a blunder.” The SC posted the matter for further hearing on August 17, with the CJI saying, “Let me see whether something I could contribute before my retirement.”
Election Commission’s counsel Maninder Singh said the SC, in its 2013 judgment, had said that promises to distribute things free were part of the Directive Principles and that the court could not interfere in it. The CJI said, “Please look into the provisions of the Constitution and Representation of the People Act to make us understand for what purpose the Election Commission is there?”