The Union Law Ministry denied rushing the appointment of two election commissioners to preempt Supreme Court decisions on the 2023 law. The Central Government defended the appointments, stating the absence of a judicial member did not affect the Election Commission’s autonomy. The Supreme Court declined to stay the appointments despite objections.
Today (12th March): The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) filed a petition challenging Section 7 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, seeking an urgent hearing in the Supreme Court. The case is connected to a recent resignation and the appointment process of Election Commissioners, which is subject to ongoing legal and constitutional debates.
The Supreme Court, led by CJI DY Chandrachud, will hear SBI’s plea on March 11 for an extension until June 30 to disclose electoral bond details from April 2019. This plea has implications for political funding transparency. The court will also address a contempt plea filed by ADR. The complexity of tracking and reporting these financial instruments is underscored.
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has filed a contempt petition Today against the State Bank of India (SBI) for seeking an extension to disclose electoral bond details. This defiance of Supreme Court’s order and the ensuing legal battle reflects the struggle for transparency in political funding, with far-reaching implications for India’s political and financial systems.
The Supreme Court, on February 13, 2024, declined to grant an interim stay on Section 7 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023. The Supreme Court, on February 13, 2024, declined to grant an interim stay on Section 7 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023 which […]