Today (18th April): The Supreme Court stressed the sanctity of the electoral process and urged the Election Commission of India to clarify measures ensuring free and fair polls. Senior advocates and officials addressed concerns about VVPAT slips, privacy, and proposed solutions to enhance transparency and credibility. The ECI reassured robust measures to prevent tampering and ensure integrity.
![[Electoral Bond Data] SBI Refuses to Disclose Data Under RTI Act](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/MicrosoftTeams-image-23.png?resize=447%2C269&ssl=1)
On Wednesday (10th April): The State Bank of India (SBI) refused to disclose electoral bond data under the RTI Act, citing exemptions related to fiduciary capacity and public interest. This refusal, including the denial of information about the payment to lawyer Harish Salve, has raised concerns about transparency and accountability, undermining democratic principles and public interest. The case may reflect future changes in RTI Act exemptions under the upcoming Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
The Kerala High Court denied anticipatory bail to Anwar Sadique K for assaulting an advocate commissioner at Tirur Munsiff Court. Justice Badharudeen stressed the severity of attacking court officials, stating it undermines the judiciary and democratic values. Sadique’s plea was rejected, and he was directed to surrender within ten days for further interrogation.
“If not for giving representation to Scheduled Castes, I would have been elevated maybe two years later,” : Supreme Court Justice BR Gavai emphasized the role of reservation and affirmative action in elevating marginalized individuals in India’s government. He credited his own advancement to these principles and highlighted the importance of diversity and inclusion in the judiciary. Justice Gavai also addressed challenges such as media manipulation and emphasized the CJI’s duty to provide equal leadership.
On Tuesday (26th March): Supreme Court Justice BR Gavai highlighted the integral relationship between the right to free speech and the right to information, especially in the context of elections and the Electoral Bonds case. Emphasizing the evolution from colonialism to democracy, he reaffirmed the Court’s commitment to upholding constitutional values and encouraging citizen participation.
The Supreme Court’s recent invalidation of the electoral bonds scheme highlights the balance between privacy and transparency in political funding. The decision emphasizes the crucial role of judicial review in safeguarding fundamental rights and underscores the significance of public access to information about political contributions. This ruling signifies the evolving nature of law and democracy.
The Supreme Court, led by CJI Chandrachud, Today halted the implementation of Fact Check Units (FCUs) under the 2023 IT Amendment Rules, emphasizing the need to examine its impact on free speech. This decision followed petitions challenging the rules, including one from comedian Kunal Kamra, who argued that FCUs could lead to biased censorship by social media platforms regarding the Central government.
Today (20th March): The Madras High Court rejected a petition to revoke the lotus flower symbol allocation to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The petitioner argued that using the national flower as a political symbol disgraces national integrity. The court questioned the petitioner’s standing and dismissed the plea, directing him to deposit evidence of genuine concern.
On Tuesday (19th March): Comedian Kunal Kamra has approached the Supreme Court to halt the implementation of Fact Check Units (FCUs) under the 2023 amendments to the IT Amendment Rules. He argues that this may lead to censorship, limiting free speech and affecting public discourse. His plea underscores concerns about online content regulation, potential impacts on democracy, and his fundamental right to practice his profession.
Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal has called for a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to examine electoral bonds. He criticized the lack of action by investigative agencies and highlighted the need for impartial scrutiny. The disclosed data reveals diverse contributors to political parties, emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability in political funding mechanisms.