The State Bank of India (SBI) has reiterated its refusal to disclose SOPs for electoral bonds, citing “commercial confidence” and intellectual property concerns. This decision follows an appeal under the Right to Information Act, emphasizing that the guidelines are solely for internal use by staff.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Recently, The State Bank of India (SBI) has once again reiterated its refusal to disclose the standard operating procedures (SOPs) provided to its branches for the sale and redemption of electoral bonds. This decision comes in response to a first appeal lodged under the Right to Information Act (RTI), as reported. The bank has consistently cited “commercial confidence” and described the information as the “intellectual property of the bank” to justify its stance. SBI emphasized that these internal guidelines are exclusively intended for the dealing staff.
Anjali Bhardwaj, an advocate for transparency, filed an application on March 4 seeking access to the SOPs issued by SBI dating back to April 2017. After the bank’s rejection of the request on March 30, Bhardwaj decided to escalate the matter by appealing to the first appellate authority (FAA) of SBI. However, dissatisfied with the response received on May 17 from the FAA, Bhardwaj has now opted to challenge the denial before the Central Information Commission (CIC).
In its order dated May 17, the FAA stated-
“The bank holds the requested information in commercial confidence and, therefore, cannot disclose it. Additionally, the internal guidelines are strictly intended for the dealing staff and constitute the bank’s intellectual property, justifying the denial under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act.”
Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act states-
“Information that includes commercial confidence, trade secrets, or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority determines that the larger public interest justifies such disclosure.”
Bhardwaj highlighted that the request for SOPs pertaining to electoral bonds stemmed from concerns regarding the ambiguity surrounding SBI’s management of transaction data for the bonds. There were apprehensions regarding the potential tracking of the bonds due to SBI’s recording of unique numbers for both purchasers and redeemers.
ALSO READ: [Electoral Bond Data] SBI Refuses to Disclose Data Under RTI Act
“Despite the Supreme Court declaring the electoral bond scheme unconstitutional and ordering the disclosure of all EB details, SBI continues to withhold crucial information,”
-she informed.
ALSO READ: SBI’s Dilemma | “SBI Can Never Match Electoral Bond Donors to Parties”: Ex-Finance Secretary
“The FAA has not demonstrated how disclosing the SOPs would ‘harm the competitive position of a third party,’ nor identified who this third party is. Furthermore, the FAA has not considered the public interest and has simply cited the document as an internal guideline to justify denial, despite no such exemption clause existing in the RTI Act.”
– Bhardwaj added.
Bhardwaj’s concerns reflect a broader debate about transparency and accountability in the handling of electoral bonds, which are financial instruments used for political funding. The lack of transparency in these transactions has been a point of contention, with critics arguing that it undermines the democratic process by allowing undisclosed contributions to political parties.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) will now have to consider Bhardwaj’s appeal and determine whether the public interest in disclosing the SOPs outweighs the bank’s claims of commercial confidence and intellectual property. This case emphasizes the ongoing tension between transparency advocates and institutions that prioritize confidentiality, often citing competitive and proprietary reasons.