Introduction
A recent petition has been filed in the Supreme Court of India, calling for the confiscation of funds received by political parties through the now-invalidated electoral bonds scheme. This plea also seeks an investigation into the quid pro quo benefits provided to donors by public authorities under political influence.
Background of the Electoral Bonds Scheme
The electoral bonds scheme, introduced in 2018, allowed donors to anonymously contribute to political parties by purchasing bearer bonds from the State Bank of India (SBI). This scheme was part of the Finance Act of 2017, which amended several statutes, including the Reserve Bank of India Act, the Income Tax Act, and the Representation of People Act. The anonymity provided by this scheme raised concerns about unchecked political funding and potential misuse.
Supreme Court's Striking Down of the Scheme
On February 15, 2024, the Supreme Court struck down the electoral bonds scheme. The Court found that the scheme violated the right to information and free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution due to its anonymous nature. The Court also directed the SBI to disclose details of all electoral bonds purchased and encashed since April 2019. These details revealed the extent to which political parties benefited from the scheme.
Contentions of the Petition
The petition argues that the disclosed details show money paid through electoral bonds was used by companies to avoid criminal prosecution or gain monetary advantages, such as contracts or favorable policy decisions. The petition claims that political parties exploited the scheme to extract money by granting undue benefits to corporate donors, compromising the public interest.
Demand for a Probe and Tax Reassessment
The petitioner has requested the formation of a committee headed by a former Supreme Court judge to investigate the alleged quid pro quo arrangements. Additionally, the plea urges the Court to direct the Income Tax Authorities to reassess the tax exemptions claimed by political parties under Section 13A of the Income Tax Act for the financial years 2018-2019 to 2023-2024. The petitioner seeks to impose taxes, interest, and penalties on the amounts received through electoral bonds.
Legal and Ethical Implications
The plea highlights the ethical and legal ramifications of the electoral bonds scheme, emphasizing how the anonymity it provided led to potential abuses of power and public resources. By pushing for the confiscation of funds and a thorough investigation, the petition aims to restore transparency and accountability in political funding.
Supreme Court's Previous Directives
In its February ruling, the Supreme Court had already taken steps to increase transparency by requiring the SBI to disclose bond purchase details. This move was seen as a significant step towards curbing anonymous political donations and enhancing the public's right to know about the sources of political funding.
Reactions and Future Outlook
The petition's filing has sparked discussions on the need for more stringent regulations on political donations and the accountability of political parties in India. If the Supreme Court acts on the plea, it could lead to substantial changes in the way political funding is managed and scrutinized in the country.
Conclusion
The plea before the Supreme Court to confiscate funds received through electoral bonds and investigate the associated quid pro quo benefits underscores the need for transparency and accountability in political funding. The outcome of this petition could have far-reaching implications for electoral reforms and the fight against corruption in India.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.