THE JHARKHAND STORY DESK
New Delhi, Feb 15: The electoral bond scheme was quashed and declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court on Thursday, citing constitutional violations of the right to information and the freedom of speech and expression.
The central government suffered a significant setback when a five-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud handed down two distinct, unanimous rulings on the appeals contesting the scheme.
SC orders disclosure of contributors
It ordered the State Bank of India to provide the Election Commission with the names of the contributors to the six-year-old scheme in a landmark decision that will have far-reaching effects.
It mandated that the issuing bank cease issuing electoral bonds and that the State Bank of India provide the Election Commission with the details of all electoral bonds purchased since April 12, 2019.
Scheme violates Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution: SC
Declaring the verdict, the CJI stated that the scheme violates Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which protects freedom of speech and expression.
The bench ruled that a citizen’s right to political affiliation and privacy is a part of their fundamental right to privacy.
Additionally, it ruled that several legislative amendments, such as those to the Income Tax laws and the Representation of Peoples Act, were invalid.
The Supreme Court had withheld its judgment on the matter after it was reserved on November 2 of the preceding year.
Govt pitched the scheme as alternative to cash donations given to political parties
As part of initiatives to increase political fundraising transparency, the government announced the scheme on January 2, 2018, and it was positioned as an alternative to cash donations given to political parties.
Per the scheme’s terms, any Indian citizen or entity that has been incorporated or created in the nation may purchase electoral bonds.
An individual has the option to purchase electoral bonds alone or in conjunction with others, without revealing their identity.
Critics argue that this undermines transparency in electoral financing and provides an advantage to incumbent parties.
