Justice BV Nagarathna criticized demonetization at the Courts and the Constitution Conference, citing lack of proper decision-making and negligible impact on black money. She emphasized the disproportionate impact on the public, with 98% of demonetized currency returning to the RBI. She also highlighted the judiciary’s role in ensuring a relevant Constitution.
The Indian government approved printing Rs 10,000 crore worth of electoral bonds just before the Supreme Court scrapped the scheme as unconstitutional. The approval and subsequent printing, handled by the Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India, sparked discussions on the transparency of political financing. Following the ruling, the Finance Ministry directed the State Bank of India to cease printing remaining electoral bonds. The scheme’s anonymity has divided opinions on political donation transparency in India.
“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.
Today (22nd March): Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for the liquor policy case and will appear before a special court. The arrest sparked political controversy, with AAP supporters calling it a BJP conspiracy and BJP defending it as a consequence of alleged corruption. Other opposition parties accused the BJP of using government agencies for vendetta politics.
CJI (Chief Justice of India) today rebuked the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Adish Aggarwala, for seeking a suo motu review of the Electoral Bonds judgment. The CJI criticized Aggarwala’s motives, cautioning him about the responsibilities of his position. This occurred during the ongoing assessment of electoral bonds by a five-judge bench.
On sunday (17th March): The Election Commission of India disclosed details about electoral bonds, revealing significant financial flows to political parties. The data lacks donor identities, maintaining anonymity in political funding. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling challenges the secrecy of the scheme and advocates for more transparency in political party funding, sparking discussions about regulation.
Today (March 18th) at 10:30 AM, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, will conduct a hearing on the Electoral Bonds Case. The bench will determine the necessity for the State Bank of India to reveal the unique identifiers of Electoral Bonds.
On Friday (14th March):Union Home Minister Amit Shah advocated for reforming the electoral bond system to enhance transparency and accountability in political funding. He respects the Supreme Court’s decision but suggests that modifications could address concerns. Shah defended the BJP’s benefit from the scheme and emphasized the need for improvements rather than its elimination.
