Supreme Court directs political parties to comply with Election Commission directives against use of public money to propagate party symbols
The Supreme Court recently directed all political parties in the country to follow the instructions issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in 2016 filed against the use of public money to propagate party symbols.
The Bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma rejected the plea challenging the construction of statues of former UP Chief Minister and Bahujan Samaj Party Mayawati, her mentor Kanshi Ram and elephants, the symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) at parks in Lucknow and Noida, built with taxpayers’ money when she was the Chief Minister between 2007 and 2012.
The Apex Court said that the instructions issued by the ECI on October 7, 2016 or its modified or substituted version referred to above shall be complied with not only by BSP, but all political parties in the country.
The Counsel appearing for the State contended that the construction was in line with the will of BSP founder Kanshiram.
He argued that funds for the construction of these memorials and installation of statutes was sanctioned through budgetary allocation after due approval of the State legislature and the passing of the Appropriation Act by the legislature in accordance with law.
Earlier, Mayawati had filed an affidavit in the Court, stating that the decision to spend public money on the construction of statues represented the will of the people.
They wanted to show their respect to the contemporary woman Dalit leader, who had decided to sacrifice her life for the cause of underprivileged communities. Mayawati further said that she decided to remain unmarried to pursue the goal of upliftment of the downtrodden.
The memorials and statues of herself and other leaders were intended to promote values and ideals of various saints, gurus, social reformers and leaders among the public and not to promote the symbol of BSP or to glorify BSP leaders, added the affidavit.
Noting that elephants were a part of the Indian architectural designs and found in a large number at various monuments and heritage structures, the State argued that their correlation to the election symbol of BSP was totally misconceived.
It further mentioned Article 282 of the Constitution, contending that legislative powers to incur expenditure were not limited only in respect of powers conferred under the Seventh Schedule.
The Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that it was an arbitrary move to glorify the Chief Minister. He claimed that the acts of the state government amounted to grabbing of public land and public parks.
The petition claimed that in constructing parks and memorials, the election symbol of BSP – elephant was widely used. It was alleged that big pillars having the motif of elephants were put up across the parks and memorials were constructed.
A set of 90 elephant statues was made at the cost of Rs 52.2 crore from the public exchequer, the Counsel pointed out, noting that public display of these statues and their permanent positioning in parks was a clear violation of the principles of free and fair election as it had an impact during the election.
The petitioner further argued that Mayawati was even constructing huge stupas, domes and memorials for herself, including a part and a memorial beside the Yamuna river in the NCT of Delhi, which amounted to a huge misuse of public money.
It especially amounted to misuse at the hands of the State authorities as they acted contrary to their constitutional duty to protect the public funds and hold the resources of the community in public trust, added the petitioner.
The plea contended that the construction of parts and statutes for an incumbent Chief Minister was against the basic structure of the Constitution as it violated the right to equality and create a special class of citizens.
The Supreme Court, however, did not pass any observation in respect of the arguments.
The Bench mentioned the ECI’s directives issued on October 7, 2016, directing that no political parties shall henceforth either use or allow the use of any public funds or public place or government machinery for carrying out any activity that would amount to an advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the party.
The Commission passed the instructions in consonance with a Delhi High Court order, which refused to grant any relief to the present petitioner. The petitioners had approached the ECI first, raising the same issue.
Although the Commission held that the petitioners’ plea was not maintainable, it assured that at the time of elections, they would no doubt take appropriate steps and measures to see that the statues of Mayawati and BSP’s symbol ‘elephant’ did not disturb the level playing field and give undue advantage to the BSP vis-à-vis other political parties.
The High Court subsequently disposed of the challenge to the ECI’s order and requested the Commission to consider issuing appropriate direction/guidelines within the meaning of Clause 16A(b) of the Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, preventing a recognised political party in power from using public places and public funds for propagating its reserve symbol and/or its leaders, so as to come in the way of conducting of free, fair and peaceful election and to safeguard the interest of the general public and the electorate in future.
The EC held that the constructions in question were carried out in 2009-10 and no retrospective action could be taken against BSP in 2016.
Considering the High Court order, however, it stated that any activity using public funds or government resources to propagate election symbols or any party, either by the party itself or the government, could invite action against the party.
The Supreme Court disposed of the petition in light of these directions.