SC has role in clean-up, not in fixing GST rates on purifiers

Context & The Gist

The article addresses the recent intervention by the Delhi High Court in a PIL seeking a reduction in GST on air purifiers. The court urged the GST Council to consider lowering the tax rate from 18% to 5%, categorizing air purifiers as “medical devices”. The editorial argues that while the court has a crucial role in pushing for environmental reforms, determining GST rates falls squarely within the legislative domain of the GST Council, upholding the principle of separation of powers.

Essentially, the piece emphasizes that the judiciary can compel action on pollution but shouldn't directly dictate tax policy.

Key Arguments & Nuances

• Separation of Powers: The core argument centers on the constitutional principle of separation of powers. The judiciary overstepping into legislative functions risks upsetting the delicate balance of the constitutional framework.
• GST Council’s Authority: Decisions regarding GST rates are constitutionally vested in the GST Council, requiring a three-fourth majority for any changes. The court’s intervention bypasses this established process.
• Public Health Emergency vs. Legislative Process: While acknowledging the urgency of air pollution as a public health crisis, the article stresses that this urgency doesn't justify circumventing the due legislative process.
• Holistic Approach to Pollution: Lowering taxes on air purifiers is a reactive measure. A comprehensive, long-term strategy is needed to address the root causes of air pollution, not just individual mitigation efforts.

UPSC Syllabus Relevance

• Polity: Separation of Powers, Constitutional Framework, Role of the Judiciary.
• Economy: GST – Constitutional provisions, GST Council, Tax Policy.
• Governance: Issues relating to pollution and environment, Role of various bodies in environmental protection.

Prelims Data Bank

• GST Council: A constitutional body under Article 246A of the Constitution.
• Separation of Powers: A fundamental principle of the Indian Constitution, dividing governmental power among the legislature, executive, and judiciary.
• Delhi High Court: Established in 1966, it is one of the three High Courts established by a parliamentary act.
• Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981: Provides for the prevention, control, and abatement of air pollution.

Mains Critical Analysis

The editorial highlights a critical tension between judicial activism and the constitutional framework. While the judiciary plays a vital role in environmental protection, as evidenced by its interventions in cases like the Aravalli case (mentioned in the article), directly influencing tax policy sets a dangerous precedent.

PESTLE Analysis

• Political: The intervention raises questions about the boundaries of judicial review and the balance of power between the judiciary, legislature, and executive.
• Economic: Lowering GST on air purifiers could increase accessibility but might not be the most economically efficient way to address pollution.
• Social: Air pollution is a significant social issue impacting public health, but relying solely on individual solutions (like air purifiers) ignores systemic problems.
• Technological: The article doesn’t directly address technology, but the context of air purifiers highlights the role of technology in mitigating pollution.
• Legal: The core issue revolves around legal principles – separation of powers and the authority of the GST Council.
• Environmental: The underlying concern is the environmental crisis of air pollution and the need for effective, long-term solutions.

The critical gap lies in the lack of a comprehensive and sustained approach to tackling air pollution. Focusing solely on reactive measures like tax reductions on air purifiers, while ignoring the systemic causes, is unlikely to yield significant results. The court’s role should be to ensure the executive and legislature fulfill their responsibilities in addressing the root causes of pollution, rather than attempting to directly legislate on economic matters.

Value Addition

• M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1996): Landmark case emphasizing the ‘polluter pays’ principle and the need for environmental protection.
• Article 21 (Right to Life): Often invoked in environmental cases, arguing that a clean environment is a fundamental right.
• National Clean Air Programme (NCAP): Launched in 2019, aims to reduce PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations across Indian cities.

Context & Linkages

This article highlights the reactive and often superficial nature of pollution control measures in Delhi, such as focusing on firecrackers while ignoring underlying issues like unpaved roads and crop residue burning. This reinforces the editorial’s argument that a holistic, long-term strategy is needed, rather than piecemeal solutions like lowering GST on air purifiers.

This article points to issues of data transparency and accurate assessment of pollution sources, specifically stubble burning. It underscores the need for reliable data and a scientific approach to tackling pollution, which aligns with the editorial’s call for a carefully thought-through long-term strategy.

This article emphasizes the significant contribution of vehicular emissions to Delhi’s air pollution. It reinforces the idea that addressing pollution requires tackling multiple sources, not just focusing on individual mitigation measures like air purifiers.

This article demonstrates the Supreme Court's active role in environmental protection, particularly concerning the Aravalli range. However, it also highlights the complexities and potential controversies in defining environmental boundaries and implementing protective measures. This context reinforces the editorial's point that while the court has a role in environmental cleanup, it shouldn't extend to areas like GST rate determination.

The Way Forward

• Strengthen the GST Council: Ensure the GST Council functions effectively and addresses legitimate concerns regarding tax rates on essential items related to public health.
• Comprehensive Air Quality Management: Develop and implement a comprehensive air quality management plan addressing all major pollution sources (vehicular emissions, industrial pollution, construction dust, stubble burning, etc.).
• Invest in Public Transport: Expand and improve public transport infrastructure to reduce reliance on private vehicles.
• Promote Sustainable Practices: Encourage sustainable agricultural practices to minimize stubble burning and promote cleaner industrial processes.
• Judicial Restraint: The judiciary should focus on ensuring the effective implementation of environmental laws and policies, rather than directly intervening in legislative matters.