The Supreme Court will hear a PIL seeking a court-monitored investigation into the electoral bonds scheme on July 22. Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra scheduled the hearing after reviewing submissions from lawyer Prashant Bhushan representing Common Cause and CPIL.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(on 19th July), the Supreme Court announced that a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a court-monitored investigation into the controversial electoral bonds scheme will be heard on July 22. This decision is expected to bring significant attention to the issues surrounding political funding in India.
The announcement was made by a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra. The bench acknowledged the submissions of lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who is representing the NGOs Common Cause and the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL). Bhushan highlighted the urgency and importance of the matter, prompting the court to schedule the hearing.
“The PIL filed by the NGOs Common Cause and the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) is scheduled for hearing on Monday.”
-said the bench, emphasizing the need for timely judicial intervention.
A similar plea, which was initially scheduled for a hearing on Friday, will also be addressed on July 22 alongside the previous PIL. This consolidation aims to streamline the judicial process and ensure a comprehensive examination of the issues at hand.
The previous PIL filed by the two NGOs alleges an “apparent quid pro quo” between political parties, corporations, and investigative agencies. The petitioners have raised serious concerns about the lack of transparency and potential misuse of the electoral bonds scheme. They argue that the scheme facilitates a “scam” by allowing anonymous political donations, which could be exploited for corrupt practices.
The plea further seeks a thorough investigation into the source of funding from “shell companies and loss-making companies” that have made significant donations to various political parties. The petitioners have pointed out that the data disclosed by the Election Commission (EC) reveals these questionable contributions.
“The data released by the Election Commission (EC) has revealed donations from shell companies and loss-making firms.”
-the plea states. The petitioners are urging the authorities to investigate these contributions and ensure accountability.
Additionally, the petition calls for a directive to the authorities to recover the money donated under “quid pro quo arrangements” where these funds are identified as proceeds of crime. The NGOs argue that such measures are necessary to uphold the integrity of the political funding process and prevent misuse of financial resources.
In a significant development, a five-judge Constitution bench had on February 15 struck down the electoral bonds scheme of anonymous political funding introduced by the BJP government. The judgment highlighted the constitutional concerns and potential for misuse associated with anonymous donations.
Following the Supreme Court’s judgement, the State Bank of India, which is the authorized financial institution under the scheme, shared the relevant data with the Election Commission. The EC subsequently made this data public, shedding light on the extent and nature of political donations made under the scheme.
The electoral bonds scheme, introduced by the Indian government on January 2, 2018, was presented as a revolutionary step towards enhancing transparency in political funding. This initiative was intended to replace cash donations made to political parties, thereby curbing illicit financial flows and fostering cleaner election financing.
ALSO READ: Electoral Bonds Case | Chronology of Events
However, the scheme has recently come under intense scrutiny. Critics argue that it has failed to deliver on its promise of transparency. A plea submitted to the court has drawn stark comparisons between the electoral bonds scheme and other high-profile scams such as the 2G spectrum and coal allocation scandals.
According to the plea-
“The electoral bond scam features a money trail, unlike the 2G or coal scams where allocations were arbitrary but lacked a clear money trail. Despite this, the court ordered court-monitored investigations, appointed special prosecutors, and established special courts for both those cases.”
The plea highlights the presence of a clear financial trail in the electoral bonds case, suggesting a more straightforward investigation compared to the past scams where tangible evidence of money trails was absent. This raises questions about the necessity of judicial oversight and the appointment of special legal mechanisms to address potential irregularities in the electoral bonds scheme.
Further allegations within the plea suggest that the ruling party has benefitted disproportionately from the scheme. It claimed that several firms which were under investigation by these agencies have donated large sums of money to the ruling party, to potentially influence the outcome of probes. This statement implies that companies under scrutiny by investigative agencies may have used the electoral bonds as a means to curry favor with the ruling party, thereby influencing ongoing investigations in their favor.
