Your oral remarks in the 'freebie' case damaged our reputation: EC tells SC

Responding to a PIL filed by lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in the Supreme Court, EC said that they support setting up an expert panel to discuss freebies, but it can not be a part of it

On Wednesday, the Election Commission of India (ECI) told the Supreme Court that the court's observations on the 'freebies' case against the body have caused "irreparable damage to the reputation of this institution built over the years". EC responded to a PIL filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay to regulate 'freebies.'

The apex court, on July 26, said, "May God save the Election Commission of India (ECI) if it can only wring its hands when electorates are sought to be bribed through freebies."

On August 3, an SC bench, headed by the chief justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana, told the Centre, Niti Aayog, Finance Commission and the RBI to make a panel and brainstorm on the issues associated with the irrational announcement of freebies during polls.

Also Read | 'What's wrong with free education, free healthcare': Delhi CM asks Centre

The Centre, through Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, had supported the PIL and said, "The freebies distribution inevitably leads to future economic disaster and the voters also cannot exercise their right to choose as an informed, wise decision."

EC told SC that the expert panel must be formed, and it will benefit from the recommendations of such an expert body. However, it must be left out of it.

"It may not be appropriate for the Commission, being the constitutional authority to offer to be part of the expert committee especially if there are ministries or government bodies in the expert body. Further, there are continuous elections in the country and any opinion/view/comment during deliberations in a multi-member body might, in the event of being publicised, amount to pre-decide the issue and disturbing the level playing field," the reply read.

The central government has criticised several state governments for distributing 'freebies' and worsening the economy's health. Prime Minister Narendra Modi called it 'revdi culture' in a rally in July.

"It is submitted that there is no precise definition of the term "freebies" in the existing legal policy framework. Furthermore, it is difficult to define the term 'irrational freebies', as both the terms- 'freebie' and 'irrational' are subjective and open to interpretation," EC told the court.

It added, "It is submitted that in order to take a holistic and comprehensive view of the matter of freebies that have potential to influence the level playing field during the electoral process, a broader appreciation of and due weightage to the multiple factors is required including."

EC further stated that things that may be life and economic saviours during a crisis might also be considered 'freebies' in normal times.

In the S. Subramaniam Balaji case, the SC had directed the EC to frame guidelines in consultation with the political parties and incorporate the same in the Model Code of Conduct.

"It is submitted that the said direction was duly complied with, and the said guidelines incorporated as Part VIII of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) now require the political parties and candidates to explain the rationale for promises made therein as well as the possible ways and means to finance such promises," EC told SC.