[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Election Commission (EC) is likely to reiterate its opposition to the central government’s controversial electoral bonds scheme in the Supreme Court.It may be recalled that recently, the Supreme Court had asked the ED to file a reply even as it declined to issue an interim stay on the scheme, as it heard a petition which challenged the legality of...
The Election Commission (EC) is likely to reiterate its opposition to the central government’s controversial electoral bonds scheme in the Supreme Court.
It may be recalled that recently, the Supreme Court had asked the ED to file a reply even as it declined to issue an interim stay on the scheme, as it heard a petition which challenged the legality of electoral bonds.
Initially, the Supreme Court gave the ED four weeks to reply, but changed the deadline to a fortnight after advocate Prashant Bhushan, who represents petitioner Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), stated that a month would be too late because the Delhi assembly elections are due on February 8.
Incidentally, the EC had opposed the electoral bonds scheme since 2017 and there is no reason for it to change its stand.
Electoral bonds are financial instruments introduced by the Modi government, claiming that they aid transparency in political funding. Potential donors can buy the bonds in denominations of Rs 1,000, Rs 10,000, Rs 1 lakh, Rs 10 lakh and Rs 1 crore from SBI branches and hand them over to a party of their choice. These bonds carry neither the name of the supposedly anonymous donor nor the recipient political party.
However, in 2017, after the scheme was first notified, the EC wrote to the Union Law Ministry that introduction of electoral bonds was a “retrograde step”.
“It is evident from the amendment which has been made that any donation received by a political party through electoral bonds has been taken out of the ambit of reporting under the contribution report as prescribed under Section 29C of the RP Act, 1951, and therefore this is a retrograde step as far as transparency of donations is concerned and this proviso needs to be withdrawn,” the EC had said in the letter dated 26 May 2017.
The EC was referring to Section 29 of the Representation of the People Act, which guides elections in India. The section calls for parties to declare the names of donors who give them amounts higher than Rs 20,000, but electoral bonds — introduced through an amendment in the Representation of the People Act, among other acts — are exempt from this rule.
In 2019, when the Supreme Court had sought the EC’s response while hearing the plea challenging the scheme, the poll panel reiterated its stand.
Later in 2019, the electoral bonds scheme was back in the news amidst revelations that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the Election Commission (EC) and the Law Ministry were overruled by the Modi government in the run-up to the introduction of the scheme.
The original ADR plea filed in the Supreme Court seeking stay on the implementation of Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018, had stated that it had opened the floodgates of unlimited corporate donations to political parties and anonymous financing by Indian as well as foreign companies that can have serious repercussions on democracy in the country.
ADR’s plea had stated that certain amendments made in Finance Act, 2017 and earlier Finance Act, 2016, both passed as money bills, has opened doors to unlimited political donations, even from foreign companies and thereby legitimizing electoral corruption on a large scale, while at the same time ensuring total non-transparency in political funding.
“The Finance Act of 2017 had introduced the use of electoral bonds which is exempt from disclosure under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, opening doors to unchecked, unknown funding to political parties,” the ADR plea had stated.
“The said amendments have also removed the existing cap of 7.5% of net profit in the last three years on campaign donations by companies and have legalized anonymous donations,” the ADR plea had stated.