New Delhi, 15-02-2024 : The recent verdict by the Supreme Court regarding electoral bonds has stirred significant debate and implications for the Indian political landscape. In a landmark decision, the apex court declared the anonymity of electoral bonds as a violation of both the Right to Information Act and Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The ruling, delivered by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, underscored the pivotal role of transparency in the electoral process.
Chief Justice Chandrachud articulated the importance of disclosing information about political party funding, emphasizing its critical role in enabling informed electoral choices and preventing potential quid pro quo arrangements. The judgment also scrutinized key legislative amendments, deeming them ultra vires and unconstitutional. Notably, amendments to the Income Tax Act provision and Section 29C of the Representation of Peoples Act were deemed ultra vires, while the amendment to the Companies Act was deemed unconstitutional.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court mandated the cessation of the issuance of electoral bonds and directed the State Bank of India, the issuing bank, to provide comprehensive details regarding electoral bond donations. This includes information about the political parties receiving such contributions, thereby aiming to enhance transparency and accountability in political funding.
The electoral bond scheme, introduced in 2018 through amendments to the Finance Act 2017, was initially touted as a measure to augment transparency in political financing by offering an alternative to cash donations. Under the scheme, citizens and entities incorporated or established in India could purchase electoral bonds, which could then be donated to eligible political parties. However, only parties meeting specific criteria, such as being registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act and securing a minimum percentage of votes in past elections, were eligible to receive these bonds.
Despite the government’s intentions to promote transparency, the anonymity of electoral bonds has been a subject of contention, with critics arguing that it enables opacity and potential corruption in political funding. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling, therefore, marks a significant development in the ongoing discourse surrounding electoral reforms and the broader issue of political accountability in India.
#ElectoralBonds,
#SupremeCourtVerdict,
#PoliticalFunding,
#TransparencyInPolitics,
#RTIViolation,
#ConstitutionalChallenge,
#IndianPolitics,
#SCJudgment