oppn parties Electoral Bonds Are Not Kosher

News Snippets

  • Supreme Court questions the continuing relevance of two-child norms. The Court observed that falling fertility rates have weakened the population-control rationale behind laws disqualifying people with more than two children from contesting local body elections. It referred the issue to a larger Bench for consideration
  • Supreme Court declines to shift Tirupati laddu case outside Andhra Pradesh. The Court rejected a plea seeking transfer of the trial, despite arguments that political statements by Andhra Pradesh's Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister could affect the fairness of proceedings
  • Supreme Court transfers Azam Khan's fresh ED bail plea to Allahabad High Court. The apex court declined to consider the Samajwadi Party leader's bail request in a fresh Enforcement Directorate case and directed that it be listed before a division Bench of the High Court on November 16
  • Two killed in Delhi building collapse; contractor booked. Two bodies were recovered after a building collapsed in Chawri Bazaar. Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta said the contractor had been booked and the concerned junior and assistant engineers suspended
  • Uttar Pradesh voter rolls show a 2.4-crore discrepancy. A difference of approximately 2.4 crore names has been reported between the state's panchayat and rural Assembly voter lists. The Election Commission has ordered the two sets of rolls to be matched
  • Gujarat announces 3% dearness allowance hike. The state government announced a three-percentage-point increase in dearness allowance for government employees and pensioners ahead of Diwali
  • Sensex and Nifty post their strongest single-day gains in months. The Sensex surged 2,008.61 points, or 2.60%, to close at 79,310.01, while the Nifty 50 climbed 576 points, or 2.40%, to 24,536.60. Financial and automobile stocks led the rally, supported by falling crude prices and renewed foreign investor buying
  • Maaya Rajeshwaran reaches WTA-level quarter-final. The 17-year-old Indian defeated Poland's Weronika Falkowska 6-4, 6-3, becoming the first Indian woman since Sania Mirza in 2012 to reach a quarter-final at a WTA Tour-level singles event
  • Tanvi Patri reaches Youth Olympics badminton final. The 15-year-old defeated Japan's Yuzuno Watanabe in the semi-final, assuring India of a medal and becoming the first Indian badminton player to reach the girls' singles final at the Youth Olympics
  • India beat Pakistan 3-2 in SAFF Championship. India defeated Pakistan in a closely contested match, having led 3-0 before conceding two late goals. The victory was reported as a significant result for India's second-string side
  • India beat Japan 4-1 to win a record sixth Asian Champions Trophy. India recovered from an early deficit to defeat Japan in the final at Mohali, extending its record as the tournament's most successful men's team
  • The Supreme Court issued notice to the Centre and the Election Commission on a petition challenging Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, which grants the CEC and Election Commissioners protection from legal proceedings for acts performed in their official duties. The petition argues that such blanket immunity could leave citizens without an effective remedy for alleged wrongdoing by the Commission
  • The Supreme Court told voters whose names were deleted from Delhi's draft electoral rolls not to be apprehensive about seeking re-enrolment through Form 6, after the Election Commission assured it that such applicants would not be prosecuted merely because their names had appeared in earlier rolls
  • Congress leader Rahul Gandhi opened the party's campaign for the 2027 Punjab Assembly elections with an Insaaf rally in Sangrur, Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann's home district, accusing the AAP government of failing to control drugs, gangster violence and corruption. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge outlined six commitments, including a drug-free Punjab, protection of farmers, employment for young people and action against corruption
  • Rahul Gandhi accused the AAP government of running Punjab through a remote control from Delhi and questioned Bhagwant Mann's ability to tackle drug abuse, making personal allegations about the Chief Minister's conduct during their time together in Parliament
Stock markets on fire due to US results, Sensex gains 2008 points to reach its highest level in 8 months
oppn parties
Electoral Bonds Are Not Kosher

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2019-04-12 21:27:24

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
The only reason that one can think for the government’s continued insistence that the electoral bonds in their present form are transparent and electoral reform is that the BJP is the biggest beneficiary of such funding. Otherwise, any instrument that is sold payable to bearer without disclosing the name of the payer can never be transparent. The government harps on the fact that since the bonds can only be purchased through banking channels, they cannot be purchased with black money. Hence, they will reduce the use of black money in elections.

But the government is ignoring the fact that if the name of the donor is not disclosed, if it is only known to the party receiving the funds, it opens the doors for corruption and quid pro quo. At present, political parties have to disclose the name of all donors who donate above Rs 20000 in cash or any amount by cheque. If a company donates Rs 2cr to any party, the party will have to disclose the name of the company to the Election Commission while the company will have to disclose the name of the party in its balance sheet. But if the donation is made through electoral bonds, the party will disclose it got the amount and the company will disclose that it paid the amount. But the party will not disclose the company’s name and the company will not disclose the party’s name. Is this transparency? Is this reform? Or is this invitation for quid pro quo?

Even the claim that it will stop the use of black money in elections is not true. Companies in India operate through a maze of subsidiaries and shell companies. These shell companies are used by the parent companies to route shady transactions that will attract attention in the balance sheet. Thousands of these companies carry lakhs of crores in losses every year till the time such losses are adjustable with future profits as per the Income Tax Act. Promoters use these companies to convert their black money into white by showing profits in the current year and adjusting the past losses. If those transactions were shown in the parent company, they would have attracted additional tax. But in these shell companies, past losses can be adjusted to escape tax. The immediate offshoot of these transactions is that the shell company is now flush with funds. Most companies who wish to obtain favour from the ruling party without disclosing their names will now use this route to buy electoral bonds and fund the parties. Instead of reducing the use of black money, electoral bonds will, in fact, increase such use with a little bit of financial jugglery. The donors will now be ready to fund as it will be less risky and they will get income tax exemption as per law.

Instead of telling the Supreme Court that electoral bonds are kosher, the BJP should admit that it has made a mistake. It should amend the provisions of the scheme to make it mandatory for both the party and the donor to disclose the names of each other in all reporting forms. Only then would the scheme would truly be reform and would perhaps reduce the use of black money in elections. The BJP should also realize that as the ruling party, it is now reaping the benefit of these bonds. But if and when the opposition comes back to power, it will be the BJP that will be deprived of such funding. Further, the electoral bond scheme as it exists now is also making people wonder if the BJP is seriously interested in weeding out corruption in government. The government should immediately modify the scheme instead of waiting for the Supreme Court to deliver another stinging order against it.