New Delhi: Supreme Court has continued the debate on the Freebies matter. The matter is being heard by the bench comprising Chief Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice CT Ravikumar.
The plea, filed by Ashwini Upadhyay seeks to prevent political parties from promising freebies to the electorate before elections.
Adv Vikas Singh says, “My Lord, retired judge of this court should be the chairman. Justice Lodha.”
SG Tushar Mehta says, “I think a Constitutional body should head the committee to deliberate.”
CJI says, “A person who retires has no value to the country.”
Adv Singh says, “Ultimately it’s the personality…Basically the intention was to start the debate. A call can only be taken after the report comes.”
CJI says, “If you are confining it to election it is different but a plea is for subsequent freebies too.”
Adv Singh says, “According to me that is very dangerous. Pre-poll is the promise stage, it can be looked into. But for post poll it is dangerous.”
Adv. Prashant Bhushan who is representing CPIL says, “Three kinds of freebies are illegal- one which violate FRs, violative of public policy and pre poll freebies. Those freebies that are rolled out immediately after the election, disturb the level playing field.”
Bhushan further says, “Giving promise before elections is like bribing the voters.”
Sibal further says, “Political parties don’t have access to financial reports. How will we manage? Governments and state governments will oppose. We have to have a system by which we move away from that. This requires a far more extensive debate before we decide what to do.”
Sibal continues, “Let the FIR be a moot if it is more than 3% commission will handle.
SG: My senior is saying don’t touch the issue, let it happen how it is happening. There are parties who may not be power in center, they are rolling out promises. The voter has no idea.”
SG Tushar Mehta says, “For all of you I will not charge electricity. People can be lured. I don’t even know from where the money will come. Electricity is one ex. Would the voter have an atmosphere where he can take informed decision. Pre-election can you promise the moon to get elected?”
CJI asks, “Why does the Government of India not form a committee to study the issue?
SG: Centre will help in every way. The committee can submit a report in 3 months, then you can consider.
Singhvi says, “Not everyone can fool public all the time. It is very ill in his (SG Mehta’s) mouth to say that he’s fully supporting the petitioner. He is on the wrong side.”
CJI says, “Why don’t the GOI call for an All Party Meeting?”
SG says, “Eventually, whatever decision, right now your Lordship will not be entering any wrong area, you will only be seeing where this line will be drawn.”
CJI says, “Biggest problem is, who will head the committee? Ultimately it is the political parties which make promises and contest elections, not individuals. Suppose if I contest I won’t even get ten votes. Because individuals do not have much importance. That is how our democracy is.”
CJI further says, “Suppose it’s opposition today, they may come in power tomorrow. Present government also has to run government and balance economy. By way of legislation or model code of conduct, we cannot control.”
SG reads SC’s order on formation of a committee for the issue. He says, “Please see my suggestions, suggestions of Union Of India for the constitution of committee.”
He further reads suggestions out.
SG says, “This is a comprehensive exercise which inputs from every stakeholder. Your Lordship may eventually take a decision.”
Singh says, “First part of Balaji judgement is not right. Firstly, DPSPs can control FRs- not right. Second, Vishakha principle would not apply- not right.”
