In the intricate tapestry of Indian democracy, electoral bonds have emerged as a contentious thread, weaving through the fabric of political funding with far-reaching repercussions. These financial instruments were introduced in 2018 supposedly to enhance transparency and curb black money in electoral financing. However, as we navigate through the labyrinth of electoral bonds and their repercussions, it becomes increasingly evident that they are but one facet of a broader challenge plaguing India’s electoral mechanism. The purported transparency and accountability have been overshadowed by opacity and questions surrounding the undue influence of vested interests.
Beyond the confines of electoral bonds lies a maze of systemic deficiencies that infiltrate every facet of the electoral process. From opaque campaign financing to the influence of money power, the fissures in the bedrock of democracy have widened, threatening its very essence.
In a democracy predicated on the principle of equality, the disproportionate sway wielded by affluent individuals and corporate entities undermines the fundamental tenets of representation and accountability. The unchecked influx of money not only distorts electoral outcomes but also erodes public trust in the democratic process.
The anonymity afforded to donors
The concept of electoral bonds revolves around the issuance of bearer bonds, which individuals and corporate entities can purchase from designated banks and subsequently donate to political parties of their choice. The anonymity afforded to donors was posited as a safeguard against undue influence and reprisals. In practice, however, the implementation of electoral bonds has been rife with challenges. The veil of anonymity shrouding donors has raised eyebrows, as it facilitates opaque transactions and undermines the very transparency it seeks to uphold. Moreover, the lack of disclosure requirements regarding the identity of donors and beneficiaries has engendered a climate of opacity, where the flow of funds remains obscured from public scrutiny.
The Supreme Court’s landmark verdict on transparency in financial contributions to political parties has far-reaching implications for India’s electoral process. The court deliberated on the Electoral Bond Scheme, which allowed for unlimited corporate funding to political parties while ensuring the confidentiality of such contributions. The apex court addressed two key issues: whether non-disclosure of information violated citizens’ Right to Information and whether unlimited corporate funding infringed upon free and fair elections.
On the first issue, the court analysed the scope of the Right to Information about political parties. It recognised the significance of political parties in shaping electoral outcomes and affirmed that voters have the right to information about financial contributions. This transparency empowers voters to evaluate potential exchanges between contributors and political parties, as well as the impact of financial resources on policy decisions and electoral proceedings.
The second issue addressed the constitutional validity of unlimited corporate funding. The court emphasised the influence of money on electoral democracy and noted that unlimited corporate funding allows companies to exert unrestrained influence over the electoral process, fostering corruption. It ruled that such practice violates the fundamental principle of free and fair elections and is inherently arbitrary.
The non-disclosure of information
The court also balanced the right to informational privacy of donors with the right to information of voters. It recognised the right to informational privacy of political affiliation, which extends to financial contributions made to political parties. However, it held that the non-disclosure of information heavily favoured informational privacy and did not adequately balance the competing interests. The court rejected the Union government’s argument that the scheme curbs black money, as it does not fall under the limited grounds for restricting the right to information.
Overall, this verdict reinforces the principles of free and fair elections, the role of the Right to Information in fostering participatory democracy, and the importance of balancing competing rights. It extends the right to information to political parties and acknowledges the informational privacy of donors while providing clearer standards for the legislature’s adherence. The verdict reinstates faith in constitutional principles and strengthens the understanding of the scope of informational privacy.
Noteworthy corporate entities have emerged as contributors of substantial donations through electoral bonds. This connection has sparked discussions about the interplay between large businesses and political favouritism, giving rise to apprehensions regarding undue influence and reciprocal agreements
One single political party has reportedly received disproportionately large amounts of funding through electoral bonds, sparking worries about the distortion of electoral outcomes and the erosion of political pluralism. This raises questions about the fairness and integrity of the electoral process, crucial democratic principles that are jeopardized by the influence of electoral bonds.
According to the Supreme Court, between 2018-19 and 2021-22, electoral bonds accounted for 58% of the total income of national political parties while, from 2019-20 to 2021-22, it was 81% of the total undisclosed income of these parties.
The revelations surrounding the utilization of electoral bonds illuminate a disturbing trend in our country: the rise of crony capitalism, where the affluent wield disproportionate influence. This phenomenon not only distorts the democratic principles of equality but also undermines the level playing field necessary for diverse voices to contribute to the political landscape.
Despite being the world’s largest democracy, India’s electoral mechanism grapples with a myriad of systemic flaws that compromise its integrity and fairness. Chief among these is the prevalence of loopholes in campaign finance regulations, which enable parties and candidates to circumvent spending limits and obscure the sources of their funding. This lack of transparency in political financing not only undermines accountability but also fosters a culture of opacity and impunity.
The impact of electoral bonds on Indian democracy is deeply troubling, with implications that extend far beyond mere financial transactions. While electoral bonds were initially envisioned as a means to bolster transparency and accountability in political funding, their implementation has fallen woefully short of these aspirations, giving rise to a litany of challenges and controversies. As we navigate the complexities of electoral financing, we must remain steadfast in our commitment to safeguarding the foundational principles of transparency, accountability, and integrity that serve as the bedrock of our democratic framework.
Electoral institutions and regulatory bodies play a pivotal role in upholding the sanctity of the electoral process and ensuring a level playing field for all stakeholders. However, their effectiveness in addressing systemic flaws has been called into question in recent years. Despite the existence of oversight mechanisms and regulatory frameworks, enforcement has been lax, allowing violations to go unchecked.
The need for curbing the influence of money power
There is a pressing need for electoral institutions to assert their independence and enforce regulations rigorously, thereby curbing the influence of money power and enhancing transparency in political financing. Strengthening the capacity and autonomy of bodies such as the Election Commission of India is essential to restoring public trust in the electoral process and safeguarding the integrity of democracy.
Money is undeniably the lifeblood of Indian politics, permeating every aspect of the electoral process and exerting a disproportionate influence on outcomes. From funding election campaigns to influencing policy decisions, the pervasive presence of money undermines the principles of equality, fairness, and representation that underpin democracy.
Ultimately, comprehensive reforms are needed to address the root causes of money power in Indian politics and restore integrity to the electoral process. This entails not only enacting legislation to regulate campaign finance but also strengthening oversight mechanisms and enhancing the capacity of electoral institutions to enforce compliance.
Furthermore, fostering a culture of transparency and accountability is paramount, necessitating greater public awareness and engagement in the political process. By mobilizing civil society, media, and other stakeholders, efforts to reduce the influence of money in elections can gain momentum, paving the way for a more equitable and democratic future.
The confluence of electoral bonds, systemic flaws in the electoral mechanism, and the pervasive influence of money in politics present a formidable challenge to the integrity and vitality of Indian democracy. These interconnected issues underscore the urgent need for comprehensive reforms to safeguard the principles of transparency, accountability, and fairness upon which our democracy rests.
The Islamic system of election
On the other hand, the Islamic system of electing caliphs rooted in the divine teachings of the Quran and the exemplary conduct of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ stands as a testament to principles of consultation, consensus, and adherence to Islamic laws. This system, devoid of parties, candidates, and monetary influence, embodies democratic values of participation, accountability, and representation within the Muslim community.
At its core lies the process of consultation and consensus, known as Shoora, comprising the most revered, pious and God-fearing scholars of the Muslim community. This method underscores the importance of mutual deliberation and the selection of the most qualified individual to lead the community.
Islamic tradition mandates that a caliph must possess exemplary qualities, including piety, integrity, wisdom, leadership acumen, a deep understanding of Islamic law (Shariah), and a steadfast commitment to justice and the welfare of the people. The legitimacy of the caliph derives not from hereditary lineage or political manoeuvring, but from the consent and support of the Muslim community. This ensures that governance is grounded in the will of the people and the principles of justice and equity, as dictated by Islamic teachings.
In essence, the Islamic system of electing caliphs serves as a model of governance that prioritizes consultation, accountability, and adherence to divine principles. It stands as a beacon of democratic values within the Muslim world, fostering effective leadership and representation while upholding the timeless ideals of justice, equality, and piety and of course, without any capital influence.
[The writer is Assistant Secretary, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind]