Supreme Court Strikes Down Electoral Bond Scheme, Citing Violation of Right to Information
Last Updated on February 16, 2024 by News Desk
The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Association for Democratic Reforms & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., has ruled that the anonymization of donor identities and contributions in the Electoral Bonds scheme is not sufficient to curb black money.
The five-judge Constitution bench, including Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, found that the purpose of curbing black money was not traceable to any grounds under Article 19(2).
The central government had defended the scheme on the grounds that it curbed black money by ensuring contributions were coming through banking channels.
The court concluded that the electoral bond scheme does not fulfil the least restrictive means test and that there are other alternatives that substantially fulfil the purpose and impact the right to information minimally when compared to the impact of electoral bonds on the right to information.
The court also questioned whether the Constitution guarantees a right to informational privacy about political affiliation and asked if this right can be extended to contributions to political parties.
The court stated that the disclosure of information about contributors to the political party to which the contribution is made would infringe political expression and that the scheme only grants de jure and not de facto confidentiality vis-à-vis the political party.
The apex court ordered the State Bank of India (SBI) to stop issuing electoral bonds immediately and held that the anonymous electoral bond scheme violated the right to information of a voter guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
