Difficult Word/ Phrase | Contextual Sense |
Sop | A concession given to mollify or placate |
Freebie | something that is free (usually provided as part of a promotional scheme) |
Unviable | Capable of being done with means at hand and circumstances as they are |
Vulnerable | Susceptible to criticism, persuasion or temptation |
Backdrop | The context and environment in which something is set |
Bypass | Avoid something laborious |
Scepticism | Doubt about the truth of something |
Manifesto | (government) a public declaration of intentions (as issued by a political party or government) |
Resonate | Be received or understood |
Distort | Affect as in thought or feeling |
Uphold | Keep or maintain in unaltered condition |
Stipulation | (law) an agreement or concession made by parties in a judicial proceeding (or by their attorneys) relating to the business before the court; must be in writing unless they are part of the court record |
Vitiate | Take away the legal force of or render ineffective |
Exert | Put to use |
Inducement | A positive motivational influence |
Prudence | Discretion in practical affairs |
A general concern over ‘freebies’ pushing the economy to ruin or unviable (Capable of being done with means at hand and circumstances as they are) pre-election promises adversely affecting informed decision-making by voters seems reasonable. However, few will disagree that what constitutes ‘freebies’ and what are legitimate welfare measures to protect the vulnerable (Susceptible to criticism, persuasion or temptation) sections are essentially political questions for which a court of law may have no answer. In this backdrop (The context and environment in which something is set), the Supreme Court’s decision to form a body of stakeholders to examine the issue raises the question whether the legislature can be bypassed (Avoid something laborious) on such a far-reaching exercise. The Chief Justice of India, N.V. Ramana, heading a Bench hearing a petition filed in public interest against the distribution or promise of ‘freebies’ ahead of elections, has made it clear that the Court is not going to issue guidelines, but only ensure that suggestions are taken from stakeholders such as the NITI Aayog, Finance Commission, Law Commission, RBI and political parties. All these institutions, he has said, can submit a report to the Election Commission of India (ECI) and Government. A suggestion that Parliament could discuss this issue was met with scepticism (Doubt about the truth of something) by the Bench, which felt that no party would want a debate on this, as all of them support such sops. The Bench also disfavoured the ECI preparing a ‘model manifesto ((government) a public declaration of intentions (as issued by a political party or government))’ as it would be an empty formality. The Court’s concern over populist measures seems to resonate (Be received or understood) with the Government too, as the Solicitor-General submitted that these distorted (Affect as in thought or feeling) the voter’s informed decision-making; and that unregulated populism may lead to an economic disaster.
The Supreme Court, in S. Subramaniam Balaji vs Government of Tamil Nadu (2013) addressed these questions and took the position that these concerned law and policy. Further, it upheld (Keep or maintain in unaltered condition) the distribution of television sets or consumer goods on the ground that schemes targeted at women, farmers and the poorer sections were in furtherance of Directive Principles; and as long as public funds were spent based on appropriations cleared by the legislature, they could neither be declared illegal, nor the promise of such items be termed a ‘corrupt practice’. It had, however, directed the ECI to frame guidelines to regulate the content of manifestos. The ECI subsequently included in its Model Code of Conduct a stipulation ((law) an agreement or concession made by parties in a judicial proceeding (or by their attorneys) relating to the business before the court; must be in writing unless they are part of the court record) that parties should avoid promises “that vitiate (Take away the legal force of or render ineffective) the purity of the election process or exert (Put to use) undue influence on the voters”. It added that only promises which were possible to be fulfilled should be made and that manifestos should contain the rationale for a promised welfare measure and indicate the means of funding it. Any further step, such as distinguishing welfare measures from populist sops and pre-election inducements (A positive motivational influence), or adding to the obligations of fiscal responsibility and fiscal prudence (Discretion in practical affairs) ought to come from the legislature. That politicians invariably back ‘freebies’ should be no reason to bypass Parliament.
Want to improve your vocabulary further? Download the Lists of Word-Meanings of Previous Months here.
Here in this article we are providing the IBPS SO Expected Cut Off 2024. Candidates…
Explore the Trigonometry Most Expected Questions for SSC CGL Tier 2 Exam to get the…
In this blog, we have provided the details related to the SSC CHSL Admit Card…
Explore the Union Bank LBO 2024 Free Preparation Resources for Online Exam to boost and…
The IBPS RRB PO Mains Scorecard 2024 has been released on its official website. Candidates…
In this article we are providing IBPS SO Exam analysis 9th Nov, 1st Shift, candidates…