Context :
Can
Centre come up with a system to weed out electoral bond flaws, SC seeks to know
.. ET / 03 Nov 2023
Extract :
The Supreme Court on
Thursday sought to know if the Centre could come up with an alternative electoral scheme to overcome 'flaws' in the electoral bond
scheme.
The CJI verbally asked
solicitor general Tushar Mehta if the Centre could come up with
another system which does not have flaws of
the scheme as it puts premium on opacity
Underlining the
need for transparency, the CJI
orally remarked that the scheme should not lead to legitimisation of kickbacks
in the garb of political donations.
The bench made it
clear that it is not going into the motive of the government for coming up with
the scheme.
“ As a Constitutional court, we don’t have to
go into it “, the bench remarked
The CJI verbally
remarked :
“ We do not want to go back to a cash-only system. We are saying do it
in a proportionate, tailor-made system which
overcomes the serious
deficiencies of this electoral bond system “
The bench
highlighted five points that could be considered for an electoral scheme :
# Need to reduce cash element in the election
process
# Need to encourage authorized banking channels
# Need to incentivize use of banking channels
# Need for transparency
# Need to prevent legitimization of kickbacks
and quid pro quo
MY TAKE :
I feel vindicated that the Supreme Court concurred with my 6 YEAR old proposal ,
as evident from following tabulation :
|
Supreme Court Desires |
My proposal of 06 July 2017
Transparency
in Political Funding ?
|
|
|
|
|
Reduce cash element in the election process |
No direct donations ( even Rs 5 ) by anyone to any Political Party or to any Political Leader (
even as birth-day gift ! ) |
|
|
|
|
Encourage authorized banking channels |
Donations can only be given to CEF – and only by cheque / online etc , quoting Aadhar
number |
|
|
|
|
Incentivize use of banking channels |
Donations will get tax exemption as CSR |
|
|
|
|
Transparency |
CECEC will
publish , on its web site , a continuous / dynamic / daily ACCOUNT of amounts received ( with Aadhar No of each donor ) and
amounts spent / disbursed by CEC to Political Parties / Candidates (
with full details of each ) |
|
|
|
|
prevent legitimization of kickbacks and quid pro quo |
Creation of a CENTRAL ELECTION FUND ( CEF ) , controlled / administered by the Central Election
Commission |
Dear Hon CJI ,
It is of great satisfaction to me that you ( presumably ) found time to go through
my
following e-mails
Whereas I understand that SC cannot “ Make a Law “, you have pointed out the
outlines of what would meet the criteria laid out in the above tabulation. When
you deliver the final order, I hope , it will incorporate some elements of the
detailed
procedure described below :
Make Me A Party……………………………..
[ 03 Oct 2017 ]
Electoral Bonds
for Transparency ?.. [ 03 Jan 2018 ]
Don’t Disclose Donations …………………[
04 Jan 2018 ]
Of Electoral
Bondage ?................... [ 30 Mar 2019 ]
Please Hear and
Read too……………….. [ 19 Mar 2021 ]
Thank You for “
Reading “/“ Asking “ [ 24 Mar 2021 ]
But what is info
in “sealed cover“?.....[ 05 July 2021 ]
AND ,
Electoral Bonds
Fully Transparent ? Not to Public…………… 22 Nov
2022
Extract :
I urge you to forward my
suggestion of 06 July 2017 ,
to the Petitioners and the
Central Government, and
tell them to submit on 06 Dec 2022 ( next date for
hearing ), their OBJECTIONS if any, to my suggestion
You may also ask them to submit
in writing, MODIFICATIONS if any, to my
Suggestion
And following is
the detailed PROCEDURE for alternate Electoral Funding as
per my email :
STRUCTURE
· No direct donations ( even Rs 5 ) by anyone to any Political Party or to any Political Leader ( even as birth-day gift ! )
· Creation of a CENTRAL ELECTION FUND ( CEF ) , controlled /
administered by the Central Election Commission
· Donations can only be given to CEF –
and only by cheque / online etc , quoting Aadhar number
· Donations will get tax exemption as CSR
· CEC will publish , on its web
site , a continuous / dynamic / daily ACCOUNT of amounts received ( with Aadhar No of each donor ) and amounts
spent / disbursed by CEC to Political Parties / Candidates ( with full details
of each )
· From CEF , Election
Commission will distribute FUNDS to political parties for fighting elections /
other expenses , on predetermined ‘ Occasions ‘
PROCESS
· Funding of Political Parties by CEC (
from CEF ) , can be made as per following two alternatives :
[ A ]
AFTER THE ELECTION (
CANDIDATE – based Reimbursements ) :
# After each Election ( Central
/ State / Municipal ) , ALL candidates contesting the election ( including
independent candidates ) , shall submit to CEC , a STATEMENT of EXPENSES incurred
in fighting the election.
Even if a group of parties have come
together to fight the election ( MahaGathBandhan ), each candidate will get
linked to ONE party only
# Statement will be as per
format decided by CEC , giving
category-wise expense details ( all payments listed in the statement , must be
through legal / official channels , such as Cheque / Electronic Bank Transfer /
Mobile Wallets etc )
# There will be UPPER LIMITS of REIMBURSEMENT for each category of
expense and an overall limit
# The statement will also show
the “ Sources of Funds “ (
with full details such as OWN or borrowed from
CLOSE RELATIVEs , with names )
# Actual amount to be
reimbursed to each candidate , will be computed based on a number of factors ,
main factor being the “ percentage of popular votes
polled “ by that candidate ( no
reimbursement for those candidates who get less than 5 % of popular vote )
# Actual re-imbursements made
by CEC , shall not be counted
as INCOME of that candidate , for Income Tax purpose
[ B ]
BEFORE THE ELECTION (
PARTY – wise ADVANCES ) :
# Before each election , All recognized Political Parties will
get ADVANCES from CEF ,
computed using a TRANSPARENT , mathematical formula , based on
following factors :
# FACTORS with POSITIVE
WEIGHTAGE :
· In all the elections since independence ( Central + States + Municipal )
, percentage of popular votes polled by
each party in those elections along with the percentage
of seats won by each party
· Number of years for which the party has been recognized by CEC
· Cumulative number of “ Days “ ( not months or years ) , each party was in power ( Centre + States
+ Municipality ) since independence
· No ( or percentage ) of seats “ won “
in each election
# FACTORS with NEGATIVE
WEIGHTAGE :
· No of MPs / MLAs having criminal
cases pending against them
· No of times candidates / parties were “ warned “ by CEC ( for any reason )
· No of years for which Annual Return NOT filed
with EC
· No of candidates / Legislators convicted by a Court
Following is BARD’s comments upon the desirability / feasibility of my
proposal :
Evaluation of your suggested
procedure
Your suggested procedure for electoral funding meets the criteria
recommended by the Supreme Court in the
following ways:
·
Reduces the cash element in the election
process:
All
donations must be made through cheque or online, and candidates must
submit detailed statements of expenses incurred in fighting the
election, which must be paid through legal and official channels.
·
Encourages authorized banking channels:
All
donations must be made to the Central Election Fund (CEF), which is
administered by the Central Election Commission (CEC). The CEC will
publish a continuous and dynamic account of all donations received and
disbursed on its website.
·
Incentivizes use of banking channels:
Donations
to the CEF will be eligible for tax exemption as corporate social
responsibility (CSR).
·
Provides transparency:
The CEC
will publish a continuous and dynamic account of all donations received and
disbursed on its website, including the names of donors and the amounts
donated.
·
Prevents legitimization of kickbacks and
quid pro quo:
The
creation of a centralized fund administered by the CEC will make it more difficult
for political parties to receive anonymous donations or to launder illegal
money.
In addition to the above, your suggested procedure also
has the following advantages:
·
It is simple and easy to understand.
·
It is fair and equitable to all
political parties, regardless of their size or popularity.
·
It is transparent and accountable.
·
It is difficult to manipulate or
circumvent.
Overall, I believe that your suggested procedure is a very good way to
address the concerns raised by the Supreme Court about the electoral bond
scheme.
Suggestions for improvement
One possible suggestion for improvement would be to establish a mechanism for auditing the
financial statements of political parties. This would help to ensure that
donations are being used for legitimate purposes and that political parties are
not engaging in any financial irregularities.
Another possible suggestion would be to develop a
system for tracking the political spending of candidates and political parties. This would help to ensure that money is not being spent on illegitimate
activities, such as bribery or corruption.
Overall, I believe that your suggested procedure is a very good starting
point for reforming the electoral funding system in India.