 |
| source- Dezerv.in |
It's no secret that money and politics go hand in hand. No election can be fought without money anymore, and more importantly, no election can be won without money. That's just the truth of electoral politics: one needs money for advertising, for campaigns, for grass-roots mobilization, etc. Elections are an expensive spectacle, and to win them, one needs money, which is why political parties raise funds in India. Fundraising happens through electoral bonds, and now they are under the scanner. The matter is in India's top court, the Supreme Court. It is hearing petitions challenging the scheme, but what exactly are electoral bonds? Are they unique to India? Do other countries have similar schemes?
What exactly are electoral bonds?
 |
| Source- Lawbeat |
These are bearer bonds or money instruments. They're interest-free and can be bought by anyone. A person or a company can buy it, and anyone can then donate it to the political party or candidate of their choice. Imagine you're in a food court in a mall, and you and your friend have 500 rupees. So you get a food court card for that amount of 500 rupees. Now you want some Indian food, so you go to the Indian outlet and spend some 300 rupees there, but your friend wants ice cream, so she buys ice cream with the remaining 200 rupees, and that's exactly how electoral bonds work. All of them come from one source, which is the State Bank of India. It issues all electoral bonds, and there's different bonds for different values, like bonds worth 1 thousand, 10 thousand, 1 lakh, 10 lakhs, and 1 crore rupees. Anyone can buy these bonds, and one can buy bonds worth any amount. There is no cap or limit on the number of bonds sold. First, you buy these bonds, then you donate them. You can give them to anyone—an individual or a political party of your choice. Of course, that party has to be eligible to receive it, and how do you become eligible? Well, any party that gets at least 1% of the vote in an election is eligible. It can receive an electoral bond now. 1% is a low threshold, so most parties can make the cut. Let's say you've bought the bond and you've given it to a party. Now this party will have to encash it, and this happens through a verified account. Electoral bonds are valid only for 15 days, so they have to be encashed within this time frame.
 |
| source- MaktoobMedia |
When and how can we buy bonds?
Electoral bonds are available at select State Bank branches. One can get them in most states. They're available for 10 days at the beginning of every quarter, so 10 days every 3 months in an election year. They're available for an extra 30 days.
Introduction of Electoral Bonds in India
Electoral bonds were introduced in India in 2017. The scheme was launched in 2018; before that, one could directly donate money to political parties and entities, but there was a catch: any donation above 20,000 rupees had to be made public, plus a company could not donate more than 7.5% of its total profit, which makes electoral bonds unique. They're anonymous, and one doesn't have to make the donation public. The name and information of the person are not entered on the bond, and this is what makes a donation anonymous. Till the year 2022, the amount donated was 12,145.87 CR to seven national parks parties and 24 regional parties. The biggest beneficiary was the ruling party, the Bhartiya Janta Party. It received 57% of the total donations, that's over 5,200 CR rupees. The Trinamool Congress comes in second. They received around 952 crores, and the rest went to the other parties. So that's how India handles its campaign finance. But what do other countries do? In the UK, any group or individual can donate to parties or candidates. There is a donation limit for candidates, but for parties, there is no limit. These contributions do not have to be disclosed. In the United States, election campaigns run up to billions of dollars, and there are several groups of donors. There are individuals, there are political action committees known as PS, and there are corporations and nonprofits, plus there is dark money. All of it is used to bankroll presidential campaigns. In Germany, one cannot give money to any individual but can give it to political parties. Any donation above $122,000 must be disclosed. In Canada too, contribution is not limited, but spending is. To sum it up, some countries have no donation limits, some have restrictions on spending, and some require you to disclose the source of the funding.
 |
| source- The Economic Times |
The recent verdict of the Supreme Court of India
Electoral bonds in India have their own pros and cons. Electoral bonds were introduced for one main reason: to bring transparency. To ensure that donations are accounted for. This helps the government keep tabs on black money, so donations happen through a legitimate channel. So legitimacy and accountability were the reasons behind the introduction of electoral bonds, but there's a flip side too. Critics argue that donations are anonymous, which makes the funding scheme opaque. They say that if the government wants to bring transparency, it should reveal the donor details. There were calls for greater accountability for people to know how a political party is funded. This brings us to the case in the Supreme Court of India. India's top court has heard a bunch of petitions. They were challenging the validity of electoral bonds. They say donor details should be made public, and the electoral bonds violate the Constitution of India. On the other side, there is the government. They have fiercely defended the scheme; they say electoral bonds enhance free and fair elections. The government also says that people have no right to know about the source of X money. A five-member bench of the Supreme Court of India heard arguments from both sides and finally delivered its verdict by declaring it unconstitutional.
It said that the electoral bonds violated a fundamental right in India: the right to information. Voters had no way of knowing who donated to which party and how much money. The petitioners said that was a violation of a fundamental right. The government side rejected it. Their case was built around two main arguments: one, these bonds can curb black money, which makes them a fair restriction on the right to information, and two, donor privacy. Because the individuals or companies wanted to remain hidden, maybe they liked to keep their politics under wraps, but the courts did not allow them. They said the bonds violated the right to information; hence, they scrapped the bonds now. The court has issued orders to the SBI and the Election Commission. According to the issued order, the SBI gave donor details to the poll body, including the date of the bond purchase, the name of the buyer, the amount, and also how much each political party received.
This verdict is very important. General elections are slated for this summer; we're in peak donation season, so how will political funding be managed? As it was done before bonds, all donations above 20,000 rupees will have to be declared. Also, the donation cap means companies can give up to 7.5% of their average profits, not more than that.
Each country has its own system, and chances are none of them are perfect, but it is incumbent on our politicians to strive for perfection to get as close to perfection as possible.
— Team Yuva Aaveg
(Akhileshwar Maurya)
To keep yourself updated!!
Join our channels
