Challenging Electoral Bonds: AIBA's Call for Constitutional Clarity

Challenging Electoral Bonds: AIBA's Call for Constitutional Clarity


1. Introduction:


It submitted that the Supreme Court of India passed a verdict of far-reaching consequences on February 15, 2024, invalidating the Government of India's Electoral Bonds Scheme. It also ordered the State Bank of India to hand over details of the corporate contributions received by political parties by March 6, 2024 and further directed the Election Commission of India to make public the details.


2. Background: Legal Challenges to the Electoral Bonds Scheme


On March 11, 2024, when the State Bank of India sought time till June 30, 2024, to disclose the Corporate Contributions, citing the complexity of the process, the Supreme Court rejected the plea and tasked the nation's largest Bank to reveal the information by March 12, 2024, to enable the Election Commission of India to make public all details by March 15, 2024.


3. Invalidating the Electoral Bonds Scheme:


Senior Advocate Dr. Adish Aggarwala, Chairman of AIBA and a President of the Supreme Court Bar Association stated that it is his duty to lay before the President these facts and seek a Presidential Reference on the issue of the Electoral Bonds case so that the entire proceedings could be reheard and complete justice could be ensured to the Parliament of India, political parties, corporates, and the general public.


4. AIBA's Plea: 


The petitioners invoked Article 32 of the Constitution and challenged the constitutional validity of the Electoral Bond Scheme, which paved the way for anonymous financial contributions to political parties.


5. Constitutional Provisions: Article 143 and Advisory Jurisdiction


By way of a 232-page judgment, the Supreme Court bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, struck down the Scheme on February 15.


6. Implications: Upholding Constitutional Values and Electoral Integrity


The Supreme Court of India, therefore, should not allow itself to deliver judgments that would create a constitutional stalemate, undermine the majesty of the Parliament of India, the collective wisdom of the people's representatives gathered in the Parliament, and create a question mark over the very democratic functioning of political parties themselves.


7. Conclusion:


Article 143 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Honorable Supreme Court to provide advisory jurisdiction. It also authorizes the President of India to seek the opinion of the Honorable Supreme Court. As per the article, if the President believes that a question of law or fact of public importance has arisen or may arise in the future, he may refer it to the Supreme Court for consideration. After conducting a necessary hearing, the Supreme Court may report its opinion to the President. These words were spoken by Dr. Adish Aggarwala.

Comments

Popular posts

Father of RG Kar Victim Loses Faith in Legal System Amid Allegations of CBI Inconsistencies

Bill Gates Applauds India's 'Namo Drone Didi' Program: A Game-Changer in Rural Empowerment and Agri-Tech

Flight Operations Disrupted Amid India-Pakistan Tensions: Air India and IndiGo Cancel Multiple Flights on May 13, 2025

Your Complete Online Guide to Land Records and Services in Bihar

District Judges' Appointment and Service: Constitutional Framework and Contemporary Imperatives

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Constitutional Provisions Governing Union Territories and Delhi: A Comprehensive Analysis of Articles 239 to 240

Equality Before Law

Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Rights of a Arrested Person in India