Die another day: Supreme Court refuses to stay anonymous use of funding instrument for now

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court asked political parties to provide the Election Commission (EC) with full details on donors using electoral bonds to provide funding in a sealed cover by May 30 but didn’t stay the instrument.

“The just and proper interim direction would be to require all political parties who have received donations through electoral bonds to submit to the EC in sealed cover, detailed particulars of the donors as against each bond; the amount of each such bond and the full particulars of the credit received against each bond, namely, the particulars of the bank account to which the amount has been credited and the date of each such credit,” the court said.

This information will remain with the EC and be subject to any eventual court order, the three-judge bench led by chief justice Ranjan Gogoi ruled on Friday. The bench also pared the window during which the bonds will be available in a year. Most of the electoral bond funding has gone to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The interim order came on a petition filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) that had challenged the anonymous nature of such electoral bonds. The NGO had urged the court through activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan to either stay the bonds or direct full disclosure in the interest of voters knowing the source of party funding.

Require an In-depth Hearing: SC
Attorney general KK Venugopal urged the court to leave any decision on the matter to the next government. He created a stir by arguing that donors and recipients enjoyed the right to privacy in such matters and that voters need not be concerned with the source of party funds.

The legal issues raised will be examined by the court at length.

“All that we would like to state for the present is that the rival contentions give rise to weighty issues which have a tremendous bearing on the sanctity of the electoral process in the country,” the bench said. “Such weighty issues would require an in-depth hearing which cannot be concluded and the issues answered within the limited time that is available before the process of funding through the electoral bonds comes to a closure.”

The interim order drew a mixed response. Bhushan expressed his dismay on Twitter.

“SC orders that parties receiving anonymous electoral bonds will have to disclose donor details to EC,” he tweeted. “Over 95% of the 3000 cr plus bonds have gone to BJP. Will the BJP disclose donors or will it say that people slipped these bonds under door of BJP office! Will the quid pro quo be known?”

The opposition Congress said the court’s ruling could lead to details eventually being revealed. “Bad news for all those who funded #BJP if they used tainted money for # Electoral Bonds. There will be a public disclosure. An investigation too,” spokesperson Sanjay Jha tweeted.

The order could be a challenge for registered political parties and possibly have a chilling effect on donors, besides creating problems for those that may not have kept such records, experts said. As per figures made available to the court, the ruling party has received 95% of funds through this route.

Technically, all the political parties could also get together to urge the court to take the order back or seek more time to comply. However, there seems to be a push for greater transparency, with the court examining other petitions that seek to bring political parties under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.