Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court represents a significant milestone in safeguarding the integrity of democratic processes. The court’s decisive action strikes down the contentious electoral bonds scheme, deeming it unconstitutional due to its inherent erosion of transparency and accountability in political funding.
Delivering a resounding verdict, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, alongside Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, emphasized the paramount importance of transparency in political financing. They underscored the fundamental right to information enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, asserting that the anonymity afforded by electoral bonds runs counter to this foundational principle.
In addition to nullifying the electoral bonds scheme, the court addressed the pernicious ramifications of Section 182 of the Companies Act, which had been amended to permit unlimited corporate donations to political parties. This move, deemed manifestly arbitrary, was found to disproportionately empower companies in the electoral arena, skewing the balance of influence and subverting the principles of free and fair elections.
The court’s reasoning echoed concerns over the potential for quid pro quo arrangements and highlighted the need for stringent regulations to prevent undue corporate influence. By equating the contributions of individuals with those of profit-driven entities, the amendment failed to acknowledge the heightened risk of nefarious transactions, particularly by loss-making companies seeking favors in return.
Furthermore, the court denounced the amendment’s endorsement of unchecked corporate sway in elections, emphasizing that such undue influence undermines the foundational tenets of political equality and ‘one person, one vote.’
The legal challenge, spearheaded by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and supported by various political entities, underscored the detrimental impact of electoral bonds on transparency and accountability. The government’s defense, centered on the promotion of legitimate funding channels and donor anonymity, ultimately fell short in the face of mounting evidence of systemic flaws and vulnerabilities.
With this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed its commitment to upholding the principles of democracy and ensuring that the electoral process remains untainted by undue influence and opaque funding mechanisms. It is a victory for accountability, transparency, and the democratic rights of every citizen.
