The 2024 Electoral Bonds Saga and the Supreme Court’s Quest for Transparency”

Understanding the Electoral Bonds Scheme: Electoral bonds were introduced in 2017 by the Government of India as a means to enhance transparency in political funding. The scheme allowed individuals and corporate entities to purchase bonds from specified branches of the State Bank of India and donate them to political parties anonymously. The anonymity aspect raised concerns about potential misuse and lack of accountability in the electoral process.

The recent development in the Indian political landscape has been the Supreme Court’s decision to hear State Bank of India’s (SBI) request regarding the Electoral Bonds case. This case has sparked significant debates since February 15 when the bench declared the government’s electoral bonds scheme unconstitutional, citing concerns about anonymous political funding. This decision marks a pivotal moment in the discourse surrounding transparency and accountability in political finance in India.

Supreme Court’s Verdict: On February 15, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark verdict, striking down the electoral bonds scheme. The bench deemed the scheme unconstitutional, asserting that it undermined transparency and accountability in political funding. This decision underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding democratic principles and ensuring fair and transparent electoral processes.

Implications of the Decision: The Supreme Court’s decision to scrap the electoral bonds scheme has far-reaching implications for Indian democracy. It reaffirms the importance of transparency and accountability in political finance, which are essential for maintaining the integrity of the electoral process. By disallowing anonymous donations to political parties, the verdict aims to curb the influence of vested interests and promote a level playing field for all stakeholders.

Challenges and Criticisms: While the Supreme Court’s decision has been lauded by proponents of transparency and accountability, it has also faced criticism from certain quarters. Critics argue that the verdict could hamper legitimate political funding and hinder the functioning of political parties, particularly smaller ones. They contend that the anonymity provided by electoral bonds was necessary to protect donors from potential reprisals and harassment.

The Way Forward: In light of the Supreme Court’s verdict, there is a need to explore alternative mechanisms for political funding that balance transparency with the protection of donors’ privacy. One possible solution could be the implementation of stringent disclosure requirements, wherein political parties are mandated to publicly declare all donations above a certain threshold. Additionally, there should be greater emphasis on promoting grassroots fundraising and reducing dependence on corporate donations.

Rules of Electoral Bonds :

1. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the State Bank of India’s (SBI) request regarding the Electoral Bonds case.
2. The case involves a five-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra.
3. The bench previously scrapped the Centre’s electoral bonds scheme on February 15, labeling it as “unconstitutional.”
4. The scheme permitted anonymous political funding, raising concerns about transparency and accountability.
5. The Supreme Court had directed the SBI to provide details of each electoral bond encashed by political parties before the scheme’s annulment.
6. Additionally, non-profits Association for Democratic Reforms and Common Cause filed a plea seeking contempt proceedings against the SBI for allegedly disobeying court orders.
7. The court also instructed the Election Commission to furnish details of donors, their contributions, and recipients, to be published on its website by a specified date.
8. The SBI was tasked with submitting details of electoral bonds purchased since April 12, 2019, to the Election Commission by a designated deadline.
9. The SBI requested an extension of the deadline to June 30, citing the complexity of retrieving information while maintaining donor anonymity.
10. The Congress party accused the BJP of using the SBI as a shield and criticized the delay in providing requested data, highlighting the bank’s technological capabilities.

Conclusion: The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the electoral bonds scheme represents a significant step towards enhancing transparency and accountability in political finance. By upholding democratic principles, the judiciary has sent a strong message about the importance of fair and transparent electoral processes. However, the journey towards comprehensive reform in political funding is far from over. It is imperative for all stakeholders to engage in constructive dialogue and work towards devising effective mechanisms that uphold the integrity of India’s democratic institutions.

Also Read: Free Credit Score Check: Step-by-Step Guide on Paytm, Google Pay, and PhonePe