SC mandates SBI reveal all electoral bond numbers without selection.
A five-judge bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud emphasized that the apex court, in its previous ruling on the electoral bonds case, underscored the necessity of transparency in political funding. The court highlighted the importance of disclosing electoral bond details to uphold democratic principles and ensure public accountability. Referring to the earlier verdict, the bench reiterated that State Bank of India (SBI) cannot selectively disclose information regarding electoral bonds, stressing the need for comprehensive disclosure. This reaffirmation signifies the judiciary’s commitment to upholding transparency and fair electoral practices, essential for the integrity of democratic processes in the nation.
In a significant ruling on Monday, the Supreme Court of India emphasized that the State Bank of India (SBI) cannot exercise selectivity in disclosing information related to electoral bonds. The apex court mandated the comprehensive disclosure of all “conceivable” details concerning electoral bonds, specifically highlighting the necessity of revealing unique bond numbers. This disclosure would establish a clear link between the purchaser of the bond and the political party receiving it. The ruling underscores the court’s commitment to transparency in political funding, aiming to ensure accountability and uphold democratic principles. The decision holds substantial implications for the integrity and transparency of political finance in the country.
A five-judge bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud reiterated the Supreme Court’s directive in the electoral bonds case, stressing that the State Bank of India (SBI) must divulge all bond details without delay. The apex court had previously instructed SBI to disclose comprehensive information, explicitly mentioning the inclusion of electoral bond numbers. During the hearing, the bench, which also included Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, J B Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, emphasized that SBI should not exercise selectivity in its disclosure. The clear directive aims to ensure transparency and accountability in political funding, underscoring the judiciary’s commitment to upholding democratic principles.
Last week, the Supreme Court of India had taken a decisive step, issuing a notice to the State Bank of India (SBI), the country’s largest bank, demanding an explanation for its failure to disclose unique alphanumeric numbers as per the court’s directives. The court emphasized that SBI was “duty bound” to reveal these numbers, adding to the mounting pressure for transparency in political funding.
This latest development stems from the apex court’s interim order on April 12, 2019, where it directed political parties to submit information about donations received and anticipated donations to the Election Commission (EC) in sealed covers. This move aimed to shed light on the financial inflows and outflows within political circles, enhancing accountability and transparency in the electoral process.
The journey towards greater transparency took a significant leap on February 15, when the Supreme Court delivered a landmark verdict. In this ruling, the court struck down the Centre’s electoral bonds scheme, which allowed for anonymous political funding. The scheme, deemed “unconstitutional” by the court, had raised concerns about opacity and the potential for misuse of funds in the political landscape.
The apex court’s decision to scrap the electoral bonds scheme came as a resounding affirmation of democratic values and the need for transparency in political finance. The court’s ruling echoed the sentiments of many citizens and watchdog groups who had long advocated for measures to curb the influence of undisclosed funding in the political sphere.
Central to the court’s verdict was the demand for disclosure. The court ordered the Election Commission to reveal the identities of donors, the amounts contributed by them, and the recipients of these funds by March 13. This directive aimed to bring to light the intricate web of financial transactions that often remain hidden from public scrutiny.
The decision to mandate the disclosure of donor information was a pivotal moment in India’s electoral history. It signaled a shift towards a more accountable and transparent political system, where citizens have the right to know the sources of funding for political parties.
The electoral bonds scheme, introduced by the government in 2018, had faced criticism from various quarters since its inception. Critics argued that the scheme provided a loophole for untraceable and unlimited funding to political parties, potentially leading to corruption and undue influence.
The Supreme Court’s verdict addressed these concerns head-on, emphasizing the fundamental importance of transparency in democracy. By dismantling the electoral bonds scheme, the court sent a clear message that the integrity of the electoral process must be upheld at all costs.
The court’s directives to the State Bank of India, as the custodian of these electoral bonds, further underscored the need for full disclosure. The bank was instructed not to withhold any information, including the unique alphanumeric numbers that could unveil the link between donors and political parties.
This push for transparency represents a significant stride towards cleaner, fairer elections in India. It aligns with the aspirations of a democratic society where the electorate is informed and empowered to make educated choices based on full knowledge of political funding sources.
As the nation eagerly awaited the disclosures mandated by the Supreme Court, there was a palpable sense of anticipation and hope for a more transparent and accountable political landscape. The revelations promised to illuminate the shadowy corners of political financing, bringing forth a new era of openness and integrity.
In the wake of the court’s verdict, there was also a call for broader reforms to strengthen electoral transparency. Suggestions ranged from stricter regulations on campaign financing to the creation of a more robust mechanism for monitoring political donations.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s stance on electoral bonds and its insistence on disclosure marked a watershed moment in India’s democratic journey. It reflected the judiciary’s unwavering commitment to upholding the principles of transparency, accountability, and fairness in the electoral process.
As the country awaited the unfolding of events following the court’s directives, there was a collective sense of optimism that these measures would pave the way for a more transparent and responsible political ecosystem. The road ahead may be challenging, but the resolve to safeguard the democratic ideals upon which India was founded remains steadfast.