The uselessness of election manifestos

A single-judge Bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh of the Delhi High Court recently held that the Delhi government was bound by the assurance given by the Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in his press conference of March 29, 2020 in which he said that Delhi government would to pay rents on behalf of poor tenants if any tenant was unable to pay rent. He defaulted on it.

The Court ruled that the assurance/promise given by the Chief Minister was enforceable, both on the basis of the doctrines of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectations. The order said "this court is of the opinion that the promise/assurance/representation given by the CM clearly amounts to an enforceable promise, the implementation of which ought to be considered by the Government. Good governance requires that promises made to citizens, by those who govern, are not broken, without valid and justifiable reasons.".

The Court, therefore, ordered the Delhi government to take steps to frame a policy to carry out the assurance given by the CM. The GNCTD (Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi) would, having regard to the statement made by the Chief Minister on March 29, 2020, to landlords and tenants, take a decision as to the implementation of the same within a period of 6 weeks, the Court said. The said decision would be taken, bearing in mind the larger interest of the persons to whom the benefits were intended to be extended in the said statement, as well as other overriding public interest concerns, it added.

Sounds shocking? Well, it does...at least in India where election manifestos and election promises have a very short shelf-life. The question of rationality apart, these promises do not even sound logical and are always just a reflection of the desperation of the leader making those promises in his/her quest to grab power. These manifestos are the aims and goals of the parties and once they are in power, those parties should prepare their "dos" list based on them.

The only constant among the changing ideologies or promises is the quest to come to power, be it visionary or divisionary, sorted out either on linear principles or binary ones. In India, election manifestos have largely been a political template which have been useless. There are regulatory mechanisms, world- wide, to control the content of election manifestos to avoid undue influence on voters. Several countries have adopted practices to maintain fairness in electioneering. In the United Kingdom, the electoral authority has the power to issue specific guidelines for manifestos as part of campaign material. In the United States of America, political parties have developed an internal mechanism to govern the charter of the party.

In some Asian countries like Bhutan, the Election Commission has the power to approve the content of an election manifesto before it is in circulation for mass consumption. In Latin American countries like Mexico, certification, registration and validation of the Federal Electoral Institute is mandatory for the nomination of contestants. But in our country, we have an Election Commission that itself is embroiled in controversies. Judicial intervention seems to be the only way out in our country to enforce the promises including those made in the House. Alas, we don't even have that luxury.