Advocate Prashant Bhushan said on the Supreme Court’s judgement on Electoral Bonds.
“In a very significant judgement which will have a long-term effect on our electoral democracy, the Supreme Court has struck down the Electoral Bond Scheme and all the provisions that were made to bring it into effect in the income tax act, in the Companies act etc. everything has been struck down. They have held that this violates the fundamental right to information of citizens to know about who is contributing this much money to political parties,” he said.
“SBI has all Records”-Great Argument by Bhushan against Electoral Bonds, Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court, in a landmark decision, has declared the Electoral Bond Scheme invalid and has nullified all its provisions in the relevant legislation. This ruling comes as a significant blow to the government’s efforts to maintain transparency and accountability in political funding.
The Electoral Bond Scheme, introduced in 2018, aimed to provide a legal framework for individuals and corporations to make anonymous donations to political parties. Under this scheme, individuals and entities could purchase electoral bonds from authorized banks and donate them to political parties of their choice. The identity of the donor would remain confidential, thereby raising concerns about the potential for corruption and the lack of transparency in political funding.
However, the Supreme Court’s decision has highlighted the inherent flaws in the Electoral Bond Scheme. The court has emphasized that the scheme undermines the principles of free and fair elections, as it allows for unlimited and undisclosed funding to political parties. This lack of transparency not only hampers the public’s right to know about the sources of political funding but also opens the door for potential misuse of funds and influence peddling.
Furthermore, the court has pointed out that the scheme fails to address the issue of “black money” in politics. By allowing anonymous donations, the scheme creates a loophole for illicit funds to flow into the political system, thereby compromising the integrity of the electoral process.
In nullifying all provisions related to the Electoral Bond Scheme, the Supreme Court has called for a more transparent and accountable system of political funding. The court has stressed the need for comprehensive reforms that ensure disclosure of all donations made to political parties, thereby enabling citizens to make informed choices during elections.
This decision by the Supreme Court is a significant step towards strengthening democracy and upholding the principles of transparency and accountability in political funding. It sends a clear message that the government must prioritize the interests of the public and work towards creating a level playing field for all political parties. The ruling also highlights the judiciary’s role in safeguarding the democratic fabric of the nation and ensuring that the electoral process remains fair and free from undue influence.
Watch on Qvive – Prashant Bhushan Exclusive
VIDEO | Here’s what advocate Prashant Bhushan said on the Supreme Court’s judgment on Electoral Bonds.
VIDEO | Here's what advocate Prashant Bhushan said on Supreme Court's judgement on Electoral Bonds.
— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) February 15, 2024
"In a very significant judgement which will have a long-term effect on our electoral democracy, the Supreme Court has struck down the Electoral Bond Scheme and all the provisions… pic.twitter.com/7Ujwk5ixdQ
The Constitutional bench, comprised of five judges, invalidates scheme and related amendments to the RPA, IT, and Companies Act
On February 15, in what one can call a watershed moment, the Supreme Court of Indian struck down the Electoral Bonds Scheme of 2017, holding the same to be unconstitutional. While pronouncing the unanimous verdict of the five-bench constitutional bench, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud held that anonymous electoral bonds are violative of the right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
As per a report in LiveLaw, the CJI stated “Crucial aspect of expansion of right to information is that it is not confined to state affairs but also includes information necessary for participatory democracy. Infringement to the right to information is not justified by the purpose of curbing black money.”
The constitution bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, had dealt with two major issues in the said case- whether the non-disclosure of information on voluntary contributions to political parties in accordance to the electoral bond scheme and the amendments to Section 29C of Representation of the People Act, Section 183(3) of the Companies Act, Section 13A(b) of the Income Tax Act should be held violative of the right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and second, whether unlimited corporate funding to political parties as envisaged by the amendment to Section 182(1) of the Companies Act violates the principle of free and fair elections.
The main issues before the bench were as follows:
- Is the electoral bond scheme constitutional?
- Does the electoral bond scheme violate the voters’ right to information?
- Can the Scheme allow anonymity with the view to protect donors’ right to privacy?
- Does the electoral bond scheme threaten the democratic process, and free and fair elections?
The petitioners’ team, consisting of Senior Advocates Prashant Bhushan, Nizam Pasha, Kapil Sibal, Vijay Hansaria, Sanjay Hegde and Advocate Shadan Farasat put forth compelling arguments, such as:
1. Suppression of the Right to Information and lack of transparency
2. Provides pathways to shell companies
3. Adds to the problem of corruption
4. Allocation of donations is inequitable
5. Paves way for backdoor lobbying and quid pro quo
6. Usage of the electoral bonds cannot be determined
7. Trading of electoral bonds
Ref: https://cjp.org.in/landmark-ruling-supreme-court-declares-electoral-bond-scheme-unconstitutional-in-unanimous-decision-citing-violation-of-right-to-information/
“Do Not Interfere” – Kapil Sibal Angry on Electoral Bonds, Supreme Court of India
Kapil Sibal expresses his discontent towards the Electoral Bonds, urging others not to intervene. This statement was made in response to the Supreme Court of India’s involvement in the matter.
In a recent statement, Kapil Sibal, a prominent Indian politician and lawyer, expressed his deep discontent towards the Electoral Bonds scheme and urged others to refrain from intervening in the matter. Sibal’s remarks came as a response to the Supreme Court of India’s involvement in the controversial issue.
Sibal, known for his vocal stance on political and legal matters, criticized the Electoral Bonds scheme, which was introduced by the Indian government in 2018. The scheme allows individuals and corporations to make anonymous donations to political parties, thereby raising concerns about transparency and accountability in the country’s electoral process.
Expressing his dissatisfaction, Sibal highlighted the flaws in the Electoral Bonds system, emphasizing that it undermines the principles of democracy and fairness. He argued that the scheme enables the flow of unaccounted money into politics, potentially leading to corruption and undue influence on political parties.
Furthermore, Sibal urged others, including political leaders and civil society organizations, not to intervene in the matter. He emphasized the importance of allowing the Supreme Court to independently assess the legality and constitutionality of the Electoral Bonds scheme. Sibal’s call for non-intervention reflects his belief in the judiciary’s role as the ultimate arbiter of legal disputes and his confidence in the Supreme Court’s ability to deliver a fair and just verdict.
Sibal’s statement comes at a time when the Supreme Court of India is actively hearing petitions challenging the validity of the Electoral Bonds scheme. The court’s involvement in the matter has sparked a nationwide debate on the merits and drawbacks of the scheme, with various stakeholders expressing their opinions and concerns.
As the legal battle over the Electoral Bonds scheme unfolds, Sibal’s discontent and call for non-intervention add to the growing chorus of voices demanding transparency and accountability in India’s electoral financing. The outcome of the Supreme Court’s deliberations will have far-reaching implications for the country’s political landscape and the future of electoral funding.
Source: The Logical Indian-Image, Twitter, PTI, CJP-Image, NewsDrum-Image
Also Read: