Electoral Bonds Case Hearing : Live Updates From Supreme Court

Bhushan: This instrument of anonymised donations is promoting corruption. Corruption free society is part of Art 21 of citizens. It is eroding democracy itself. It is skewing the level playing field

CJI: In the erstwhile regime, prior to Electoral Bonds, corporate could make contributions as well. But it was 7.5% of total profit. The difference was that you had a duty to disclose. By disclosure there could be public scrutiny of whether this is really a quid pro quo.

Bhushan: Electoral bonds cannot even be taken by smaller parties which receive less than 1% votes and they cannot be received by individual candidates. Therefore, by privileging the ruling party, this instrument is further skewing the level playing field

Bhushan: Today, unequal use of money power is universally recognised by various bodies and the judgement of this court as something that erodes the concept of free and fair elections.

Bhushan: Electoral Bonds are further making the level playing field unequal. Almost all bonds- 99.9% have gone to ruling party at centre and states

Bhushan: Only one party- the CPM, which is before this court has consciously refused to take electoral bonds.

CJI: Therefore, by concentrating the allocation of Electoral Bonds to the party in power- this is a very important source of perpetrating power and therefore it is contrary to democracy. That can be your submission.

CJI: So we can formulate it like this- that a party in power is in a much more vantage position to secure a greater amount of funding through electoral bonds because of its ability to dole out a quid pro quo in form of govt contract, leases, licenses, concessions.

Bhushan: As per the Law Commission, financial superiority translates into electoral advantage. So richer candidates and parties have a greater chance of winning an election.

CJI: Mr Bhushan, perhaps we'll keep individual cases out of reckoning. The reason is those companies are not before us. Any observation we make about the companies may implicate them of criminal wrongdoing. So we will take it as an illustration to buttress your argument.

Bhushan: Yes Yes, it's only an illustration.

Bhushan: There are a number of mining contracts Vedanta got and they're also a large donors of electoral bonds. Now see these other examples which show that these bonds are given as kickbacks to influence govt decisions and policies.

Bhushan: IFP Agro Industries Ltd made this disclosure under the LODR requirements of SEBI. They have given an indication that the company has given Electoral Bonds because the company was facing excise issues.

The bench has reconvened.