Freebies, not taking the EC way out

The Supreme Court asking for the Finance Commission's help in regulating electoral promises of 'freebies' made by political parties is welcome. It is also a desperate measure. The Election Commission (EC) playing Pontius Pilate and washing its hands off any means to regulate electoral handouts is, however, disconcerting. EC believes that in the matter of freebies, it is for the voter to decide - the equivalent of leaving the decision of providing alcohol or not to the alcoholic. The apex court has asked GoI to seek the advice of the Finance Commission to tackle this runaway fiscal malaise. Playing the honest broker is, indeed, one way - last ditch, to be sure - to get everyone take the matter seriously.

Can an institution mandated by the Constitution with the 'superintendence, direction and control of elections' shrug away an electoral practice that is damaging, especially at a time when fiscal responsibility is no longer just about being righteous? There is case law establishing that 'elections' referred to in Article 324 of the Constitution is a reservoir of power to act for the purpose of having free and fair elections, in which 'elections' includes an entire process comprising several stages that go beyond hustings and campaign etiquette. GoI is right to say that determining whether an electoral promise of a freebie is akin to 'bribing' an electorate for votes is a call EC should make.

By inviting suggestions in open court on the way forward, the apex court has acknowledged EC's shyness in engaging in an issue that is the well within the commission's remit. The courts must stick to the law, and refrain from straying outside its jurisdiction. Which it has. It would be wise for EC to heed the court and lend it its ear.