Electoral Bonds Scheme-24

Electoral Bonds Scheme

The Electoral Bonds Scheme was revoked by the Supreme Court. Regarding the petitions contesting the legality of the Election Bond Scheme, the Supreme Court rendered a decision on Thursday.

The supreme court declared, “Violation of the Right to Information for the purpose of curbing black money is not justified,” in response to petitions contesting the legality of the electoral bond programme.

Freedom of expression and access to information are violated by the electoral bond scheme. It is against the goal to withhold information regarding political party funding.”

Follow Our Digiknowledge.co.in Page for Latest update about Bikes, Cars, Sports, , Life style and many more.

Instructions to share data of electoral bonds till 31st March:-

Election bonds must end right away, per the court’s judgement. As per the court’s directive, “State Bank of India (SBI) should give the Election Commission all the details of the contributions made so far through electoral bonds by March 31.” By April 13, the Election Commission was also ordered by the court to post the material on its website.

Both decisions unanimous

Chief Justice DV Chandrachud of the Supreme Court stated that every judge hearing this issue had reached a unanimous decision. Regarding the petitions that contest the legality of the central government’s electoral bond programmed, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud states that there are two distinct, unanimous rulings: one authored by him and the other by Justice Sanjiv Khanna.

The Supreme Court rules that electoral bonds must be revoked.

The electoral bond plan violates Article 19(1), the court added (a). The court ruled that it was unconstitutional. The electoral bond programme was invalidated by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has ruled that the electoral bond plan is unlawful and must be abandoned.

What did the CJI say?

The Supreme Court rules that as corporate donations through electoral bonds are made only as a means of exchange for favours, information about those donors should be made public.
According to CJI DY Chandrachud, there are two distinct rulings that are unanimous, one authored by him and the other by Justice Sanjiv Khanna.

According to the Supreme Court, political parties have a place in the electoral process and voters need to know how much money each party receives.
State Bank of India would need to receive all of the information from CJI in three weeks.
There are alternative methods to stop black money, the court declared.
Banks were instructed by the Supreme Court to cease issuing electoral bonds immediately.

For this reason, I submitted the petition: Jaya Thakur

Jaya Thakur, one of the petitioners, commented on the Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of disclosing the amount and identity of donors to political parties in relation to the lawsuits contesting the legality of the electoral bond programme.

It was said that you may purchase bonds from the bank and donate the proceeds to the party of your choice, but your identity would remain hidden—a violation of the Right to Information—when the electoral bond plan was first suggested in 2018.

It’s best not to reveal either piece of information. Consequently, I petitioned the Supreme Court, stating that it ought to be open and transparent and that the donor’s identity, amount, and charitable purpose should be disclosed.

The petitioners claim that political financing associated with electoral bonds compromises openness and infringes on voters’ right to information. The petitioner further claimed that contributions might be made using front firms under the scheme.

Which defence did the government provide in court?

The money was being utilised for political financing through legal banking channels, the central government said in defence of the plan. In addition, the administration said that in order to prevent political parties from taking revenge on them, it was imperative to keep the donors’ identities .