In a watershed moment, India's Supreme Court has declared the electoral bonds scheme unconstitutional, citing violations of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. Specifically, the court emphasized that the scheme's aim to combat black money does not justify its infringement on citizens' rights to information and freedom of speech and expression.
Led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, a Constitution bench comprising five judges mandated that the State Bank of India (SBI) disclose comprehensive details of each electoral bond redeemed by political parties. These details, including the redemption date and bond denomination, must be submitted to the Election Commission by March 6 and subsequently published on the commission's website by March 13.
Chandrachud underscored the disproportionate influence that political contributions afford donors, granting them privileged access and sway over policymaking processes. The court highlighted concerns that such contributions could lead to quid pro quo arrangements, compromising the integrity of governance.
While the electoral bonds scheme has been overturned, the court urged exploration of alternative measures to address concerns about black money in political funding. This ruling marks a significant setback for the existing system, particularly for Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which has been a major beneficiary of the scheme since its inception.
Critics have long condemned the electoral bonds system for its opacity in channelling funds to political parties, with concerns about the misuse of black money. However, the government defended the scheme as a means to curb cash-driven political funding, providing donors with anonymity and tax exemptions.
Undeclared individuals and companies have purchased electoral bonds amounting to billions of rupees, with a significant portion of donations flowing to the BJP. The opaque nature of the scheme has been challenged by opposition parties and civil society groups, citing concerns about transparency and accountability in political funding.
The electoral bonds system allowed individuals and companies to purchase bonds from the SBI and allocate them to political parties of their choice. These bonds, exempt from taxation, were redeemed for cash by the recipient parties, without disclosing the donor's identity. While cash donations remain permissible, they do not enjoy the same tax exemptions as electoral bonds.
The Supreme Court's decision reinstates corporate donation limits, recognizing the disproportionate influence of companies in the electoral process. It emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in political funding, signaling a significant shift in India's political landscape.
The Supreme Court's landmark ruling on the electoral bonds scheme represents a significant step towards ensuring transparency and accountability in Indian politics. By upholding fundamental rights and advocating for greater disclosure, the court has set a precedent for promoting integrity in electoral financing, paving the way for a more transparent and accountable political landscape.
