A five-judge Constitution Bench on Wednesday flagged how the ‘selective anonymity’ of the electoral bonds scheme makes it easier for the ruling party to obtain information about the donors of the opposition parties qua law enforcement agencies.
‘The problem with the scheme is that it provides selective anonymity. It is not completely anonymous. It is not confidential qua the SBI. It is not confidential qua the law enforcement agency’, Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud, heading the Bench observed orally.
The Chief Justice also observed that the scheme in its attempt to bring white money into the political funding process is creating a ‘complete information hole’. While the motive is laudable, he questioned if the scheme has adopted proportional means to achieve it.
Electoral Bonds Case LIVEDefending the scheme, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that anonymity is required in donations made through electoral bonds to ensure that there is no apprehension of retribution from other political parties. He highlighted how prior government initiatives aimed at addressing the use of unaccounted cash for political donations had proven unsuccessful because donors were insistent on maintaining their confidentiality.
The Constitution Bench is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the electoral bonds scheme. The scheme, which was notified on January 2, 2018, introduced money instruments through which companies and individuals in India can donate to political parties anonymously.
Earlier, the court raised concerns about influential entities covertly setting up persons with verified accounts to purchase electoral bonds for them through the regular banking route in order to curry favours or anonymously enter into a quid pro quo with ruling political parties.
Also read | Electoral bonds case: Live updates from Supreme Court | Day 1Advocate Prashant Bhushan appearing on behalf of ADR submitted that there is substantial evidence to believe that money is being given through electoral bonds as kickbacks in lieu of favourable government policies. He pointed out that whether at the Centre or in states, it is the ruling parties that receive the maximum share of the funds.
Also read | The legality of the electoral bonds scheme | ExplainedFollow live updates from day 2 of the court hearing: