Still Hanging Fire On Transparency

Context: The Supreme Court need to go beyond appealing to the fictional conscience of lawmakers and play a pro-active role in cleansing perennial issues in the Indian electoral system.

Issues in the Indian electoral system

• Criminalisation of politics: In 2004, 24% of the Members of Parliament had criminal cases pending against them. This figure rose to an alarming 43% after the 2019 general elections.
• Contempt for citizen’s right to know:
  • After judgment in Union of India v. ADR (2002), wherein all candidates standing for elections were directed to file an affidavit declaring their educational, financial and criminal backgrounds, political parties amended the Representation of the People Act, 1951, to nullify the disclosure requirements.
  • In 2013, the full bench of the Central Information Commission (CIC) declared six national political parties ‘public authorities under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. Immediately a bill was introduced in Parliament to amend RTI law to exclude political parties from its ambit.
  • Following the policy of what can only be termed ‘uncivil disobedience’, without obtaining a stay on the Commission’s order from any Court, parties have steadfastly refused to comply with the directive.
• Issues in political funding and electoral bond scheme (EBS):
  • The EBS scheme opened the floodgates of unlimited anonymous funding to political parties by Indian and foreign sources and showcased asymmetry of information in favour of the party in power.
• Side-lined role of judiciary: To no avail, the Court has repeatedly appealed to the conscience of lawmakers to take steps to ensure greater transparency of political parties and prohibit involvement of persons with criminal antecedents in the polity.

Way forward: Keeping in mind the tremendous public interest at stake, the time has come for the judiciary to play a more proactive role.

• The Supreme Court needs to urgently hear the electoral bonds matter and the challenge to the refusal of political parties to comply with the CIC’s order.
• Enforcing judicial directives: Judiciary could consider putting in place a mechanism to monitor compliance with its directions prior to all State and general elections and debar candidates who violate its orders.