India’s voters deserve a bond — of probity

Context: This passage examines the Electoral Bond Scheme (EBS), a policy designed to bring transparency to political funding in India.

Objective of Electoral Bond Scheme (EBS)

Addressing Transparency Issues: The EBS aimed to tackle challenges related to opaque political funding and black money circulation, as highlighted in the Budget Speech 2017-18. Finance Minister's recognition of the longstanding problem of anonymous donations underscored the need for reform in political financing mechanisms.
Proposed Solution: The Finance Minister proposed the EBS as a means to enhance transparency and accountability in political funding, thereby curbing the generation of black money. The objective was to create a system that would transform the financial landscape of political parties and ensure cleaner funding channels.

Creation of 'Clean' Funding Channel: The EBS facilitated a transparent route for transferring funds from donors' accounts to political parties' accounts, ostensibly eliminating anonymity in political contributions.
- However, concerns arose regarding the legitimacy of funds used to purchase bonds and the potential for contamination of the 'clean' channel.
Confidentiality Clause Conundrum: Section 7(4) of The Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018, mandated confidentiality of buyer information, posing challenges for investigations into the sources of funds.
- Lack of record-keeping by banks raised questions about traceability and accountability in the bond purchase process.

Source Legitimacy Doubts: Disclosure of disproportionate bond purchases relative to buyers' business income raised suspicions about the source of funds and their 'clean' nature. Lack of safeguards and oversight mechanisms rendered the EBS vulnerable to misuse and exploitation.
Investigative Impediments: Challenges in investigating fund sources due to confidentiality clauses and limited record-keeping posed obstacles to ensuring transparency and accountability.
Questions arose regarding the impartiality and effectiveness of agencies tasked with probing potential malpractices.

Incomplete Information & Limited Investigations: The State Bank of India (SBI) lacks sufficient information about bond purchasers, hindering investigations. This limited data might only reveal funding sources, not the link between donors and political parties.
This gap makes it difficult to probe allegations of quid pro quo (favors for donations).
Accountability: The EBS design raises concerns about enforcing the law and the bank's accountability. The confidentiality clause seems to contradict the need for information disclosure. The lack of records by SBI undermines its ability to assist investigations.
Potential for Misuse and Uneven Playing Field: Court-mandated disclosures could lead to endless corruption investigations. This might unfairly target donors who contributed to the ruling party. Political parties that haven't used EBS might be disadvantaged by disclosure requirements.

Parliament's Role in Finding a Solution: The author argues Parliament, not the courts, should determine the best course of action. This is because Parliament has the power to make laws and is accountable to the people.
Engaging in Discourse: Emphasizing the need for inclusive discussions involving stakeholders to formulate effective regulations, addressing concerns surrounding political funding comprehensively.
Promoting Transparency and Equity: The importance of transparency and fairness in financial matters related to politics to foster public trust in the governance system is asserted.

Evaluating Misconduct: The methodology of assessing the severity of political misconduct based on its prevalence is questioned, advocating for alternative criteria.
Advocating for Ethical Funding: Advocating for political parties to adhere to ethical standards by accepting only transparent and lawful financial contributions, ensuring integrity in the political process.
Fostering Diverse Political Landscapes: The desire for distinctiveness among political parties to offer meaningful choices to voters, thereby enriching democratic participation, is expressed.
Striving for Effective Governance: The public's entitlement to trustworthy governance, characterized by accountability and responsiveness to citizens' needs and aspirations, is asserted.