The Election Commission’s point of view is that “illogical” and “Revdi” It is difficult to define both. An election promise can be a rewari for someone, But it can also be felt by one to be an urgent political issue.
The Election Commission of India should be commended for taking a prudent and constitutional stand on the central government’s debate on Rewari culture. A similar stand was expected from the Supreme Court, but it tried to give some legitimacy to the discussion by taking the basis of a petition apparently filed with a political motive. The debate was started by Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself and he is taking it forward continuously. His foreign minister even linked this debate to the crisis in Sri Lanka. S Jaishankar said that the lesson in Sri Lanka’s crisis is that the ravadis should not be distributed. On Wednesday, the Prime Minister termed the culture of political parties promising free services against the national interest. The Prime Minister has every right to express an opinion which he should make a political issue. He should motivate his party and its leaders not to make any such promises at the time of elections. But if any other party makes such a promise, it would be against the democratic spirit to call it anti-national.
Similarly, the Supreme Court’s suggestion that a committee consisting of persons belonging to government and non-government organizations should be formed to put a hold on election promises of distributing “irrational revdis” (freebies) is highly problematic. The Election Commission has rightly refused to be a part of any such committee. It is worth mentioning that it is difficult to define both irrational and revri. An election promise may be a rewari to some, but it may also feel like an urgent political issue. According to the commission, it is also possible that what is called Revdi in normal days may prove to be a life saving measure in times of disaster. So it would be desirable that the Commission’s point of view should be taken into account and this debate should be put to rest. Anyway, no democracy can run without relying on the conscience of the people. Then why not leave it to the people whether they want “Ravdis” or not.
