An electoral bond is a financial instrument for making donations to political parties. According to the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018, it is a bond issued in the nature of a promissory note, which shall be bearer in character. A bearer instrument is one which does not carry the name of the buyer or payee, no ownership information is recorded and the holder of the instrument (i.e. political party) is presumed to be its owner.
The scheme allows individuals, who are citizens of India, and domestic companies to donate these bonds — issued in multiples of Rs 1,000, Rs 10,000, Rs 1 lakh, Rs 10 lakh, and Rs 1 crore — to political parties of their choice. The Supreme Court of India on February 15, 2024, struck down the electoral bonds scheme for anonymous funding to political parties as “unconstitutional”.
This argument is akin to retrograde men admonishing women wearing short casual dresses, and terrifying them of being raped if not wearing burqa type dress.
Why would the non ruling/ ruling or receiving/ non receiving party victimise those not donating to it or donating to rival. This means those donating to it would be favoured or incentivised, doesn’t it. So your argument implies existence of rampant crony capitalism.
How can they being victimised if there is rule of law and business contract allotment is fair, or it is not? Your argument implies it’s not.
So how would maintaining confidentiality will solve these problems if they are creating and perpetuating them in the first place.
I couldn’t get past this opinion piece beyond the first paragraph.
1. How do u explain corporations, especially regulated and contractual based corporations, making most donations (or bribing) only the ruling parties, be it BJP in centre and states or Congress in states.
2. What is their motivation behind these act of bribery? Aren’t all these only corrupting the business/ political environment of our country, where honest corporations are discouraged. Aren’t they increasing crony capitalism?
we all know which companies are cronies of the government, don’t we. These companies don’t subscribe to any particular party, they bribe only the party in power. So how would they be victimise? I mean we all know about Ambani and Adani. Ambani, tata, birla etc all have donated to Congress in past, have they been victimised by BJP. No they flourished in BJP ruling as well. so shut your nonsensical thinking.
How could they be victimised by any govt, there is rule of law, not? If not, isn’t we have bigger problem to deal with in the first place. I mean if there is no rule of law how could we have any policy at all.
This ‘would be’ attitude has misguided policy making ever since there are policies. “Don’t empower courts they would subjugate govt” etc. what’s the reality (all over world and history) courts subjugating govt or the OPPOSITE. The reality is that only honest corporations/ business practices and honest parties/policies are victimised. This is the reality, not “would be”.
Instead we must have Completely TRANSPARENT Electoral Bonds and some political maturity that running a political campaign is a costly affair. And u will absolutely see that this revelation of SC only prove my point– It will victimise absolutely nobody. Meh, electoral donations are OPEN SECRETS in our country, aren’t they. Who has been victimised, name one!
Elon Musk openly opposes the most powerful man on the planet of Earth, yet his company is doing more than fine: Rule of Law is supreme. And Americans act like the Rule of Law is supreme.
I repeat this again: Transparent Electoral Bond will do no harm to any body. It will only strengthen honesty, freedom, economy, and democracy. And if encouraged, it will also increase the quantity and quality of donations. It will encourage economically prudent parties and policies. It will also encourage honest businessmen to participate more in financing economically sound ideas and their originators.
End this paranoia of confidentiality. Let us focus on the bigger problems of our country, which are so difficult that even the best and sincere effort of ours might not be enough.