The Clash Between the Supreme Court and Electoral Bonds - Unraveling the Transparency Dilemma

# Deciphered: The Clash Between the Supreme Court and Electoral Bonds - Unraveling the Transparency Dilemma

In a groundbreaking decision on February 15, 2024, the Supreme Court of India declared the Electoral Bond scheme unconstitutional. Initiated in 2017, this scheme permitted anonymous donations to political parties through the acquisition of electoral bonds from designated banks, primarily the State Bank of India (SBI).

The verdict, delivered by a five-judge Constitution Bench, was a response to petitions challenging the scheme's lack of transparency, with critics contending that anonymous political funding breeds corruption and erodes democratic accountability.

**The Heart of the Matter**

Primary concerns surrounding electoral bonds included:

- **Opacity:** Donors remained anonymous, impeding public scrutiny of political party funding.

- **Imbalanced Field:** Smaller parties with limited fundraising capabilities potentially faced disadvantages compared to their larger counterparts.

- **Risk of Misuse:** Anonymity could facilitate money laundering and the influence of undisclosed interests.

**Supreme Court's Rationale**

The Court underscored several points in its judgment:

- **Right to Information Violation:** Deeming anonymity a violation of citizens' fundamental right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

- **Electoral Process Threat:** Expressing concern that anonymous funding could unduly influence political parties and compromise the fairness of elections.

- **Insufficient Safeguards:** Existing measures against misuse of electoral bonds were considered inadequate.

**SBI's Role and the Escalating Dispute**

The Court instructed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to receive details of each electoral bond encashed by political parties within three weeks. However, the SBI, responsible for issuing the bonds, sparked fresh controversy.

- **Disclosure Delay:** Despite the Court's set deadline, the SBI sought an extension until June 30, 2024, raising questions about the bank's commitment to transparency.

**Looking Forward**

The Supreme Court's verdict and the subsequent actions by the SBI have ignited a national debate:

- **Will the Court grant an extension to the SBI?**

- **How will the ECI enforce the disclosure mandate on political parties?**

- **Is a legislative response imminent following the Court's judgment?**

**Towards Transparency**

While the Supreme Court's decision marks a crucial stride toward political funding transparency, effective implementation is essential for a leveled playing field and preventing potential misuse.

Citizen awareness and sustained scrutiny of political party funding practices remain pivotal for upholding a healthy democracy.

**Stay updated** for further developments on this unfolding narrative. Share your thoughts in the comments below! Do you advocate for stricter regulations on political funding in India?