S. Subramaniam Balaji vs Govt. of Tamil Nadu and Others<\/em> had directed the Election Commission to frame guidelines with regard to the contents of election manifestoes in consultation with all the recognised political parties.<\/p>\nThe principles which led to the framing of such guidelines are quoted below from the judgment:<\/p>\n
(i) \u201cAlthough, the law is obvious that the promises in the election manifesto cannot be construed as \u2018corrupt practice\u2019 under Section 123 of RP Act, the reality cannot be ruled out that distribution of freebies of any kind, undoubtedly, influences all people. It shakes the root of free and fair elections to a large degree.<\/p>\n
(ii) \u201cThe Election Commission, in order to ensure level-playing field between the contesting parties and candidates in elections and also in order to see that the purity of the election process does not get vitiated, as in past been issuing instructions under the Model Code of Conduct. The fountainhead of the powers under which the Commission issues these orders is Article 324 of the Constitution which mandates the Commission to hold free and fair elections.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are mindful of the fact that generally political parties release their election manifesto before the announcement of election date, in that scenario, strictly speaking, the Election Commission will not have the authority to regulate any act which is done before the announcement of the date. Nevertheless, an exception can be made in this regard as the purpose of election manifesto is directly associated with\u2014the election process.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Election Commission held a meeting with recognised national and state parties. Most opposed any meddling by the Commission in their manifestoes, claiming that making promises was a healthy democratic practice. After due consideration, the Commission issued the following guidelines:<\/p>\n
(i) The election manifesto shall not contain anything repugnant to the ideals and principles enshrined in the Constitution and further that it shall be consistent with the letter and spirit of other provisions of the Model Code of Conduct.<\/p>\n
(ii) The Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined in the Constitution enjoin upon the State to frame various welfare measures for the citizens and therefore there can be no objection to the promise of such welfare measures in election manifestos. However, political parties should avoid making those promises which are likely to vitiate the purity of the election process or exert undue influence on the voters in exercising their franchise.<\/p>\n
(iii) In the interests of transparency, level-playing field and credibility of promises, it is expected that manifestoes also reflect the rationale for the promises and broadly indicate the ways and means to meet the financial requirements for it.<\/p>\n
It is felt, and may be rightly so, that most voters hardly go by manifestoes and believe in what they have in hand. So freebies are always more than welcome. However, what the Chhattisgarh government is doing now, may and should be challenged under Article 14 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n
The state government has decided to distribute the smartphones to BPL families on the basis of ration cards. It has already been found that BPL cards issued by the state are a scam. More than 76 lakh cards had been issued when according to the state\u2019s population, less than 50 lakh are eligible.<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court had laid down rules against sexual harassment in the workplace which came to be identified as the Vishakha guidelines. It has clearly said that the Court had interfered only because there was a gap in legislation. Perhaps it will have to re-examine the freebies given by state governments too or they will become more bold in distributing state funds without a care for constitutional proprieties.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Above: Rural women with mobile phones\/Photo courtesy: indianfolk.com The Chhattisgarh government\u2019s poll-eve decision to distribute 50 lakh smartphones to all BPL card holders has raised questions about electoral and constitutional propriety ~By Neeraj Mishra in Raipur The Supreme Court has time and again been faced with the issue of free consumer goods distributed by various […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":50167,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[602],"tags":[45248,5091],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/d2r2ijn7njrktv.cloudfront.net\/IL\/uploads\/2018\/06\/Smart-Phone.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50163"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=50163"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50163\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/50167"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50163"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50163"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50163"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}