Election Bonds Unconstitutional in India: Implications for Democracy and Political Transparency
Keywords:
Electoral bonds, political, funding, donations, transparency, right to information, electoral reforms, elections, democracy.Abstract
The Indian Supreme Court's recent decision that electoral bonds are unconstitutional is examined in this essay. Introducing electoral bonds in 2017 gave contributors an opportunity to support political parties without giving their identity out. Opponents countered that the opaqueness permitted unrestricted and limitless corporate contributions to political parties. This infringed against the Indian Constitutional right of citizens to knowledge. In this document, the State Bank of India's election bond system is explained. In order to make a direct financial contribution to the parties' accounts, donors might buy bonds in different quantities anonymously. The article explains how the judges unanimously decided that bonds violated the public's right to know where political money originates. They did this by analyzing the Supreme Court's reasoning. Arguments for preserving donor privacy were outweighed by this privilege. The bond's inability to prevent black money as claimed was also discovered by the court. Thus, all bond transaction details must be provided to the Election Commission by the State Bank. The impending national elections in 2024 will take place prior to the release of this data. We examine the ramifications of this decision, including how it may affect the finances of the ruling party and the credibility of the Indian elections. In the end, the report emphasizes how fair, constitutional political funding systems must strike a compromise between transparency and reasonable privacy concerns. By facilitating voter awareness and control of donor influences, this will enhance Indian democracy. The background information, important details, arguments made in support of the court verdict, consequences, and conclusions of the entire study article are all included in the abstract. By emphasizing how the case preserved democratic values of accountability and openness against possible misuses of anonymous political donations, it highlights the importance of the subject.