0

Supreme Court Upholds Transparency in Elections: Ensures Voter Rights and System Integrity  

Case title: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS VS ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

Case no.: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 434 OF 2023

Dated on:26th April 2024

Quorum: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA and HON’BLE MR DIPANKAR DATTA

FACTS OF THE CASE

The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a non-governmental organization focused on electoral and political reforms, filed a petition against the Election Commission of India (ECI) and another respondent. The case was centered around the transparency and accountability in the electoral process, particularly regarding the disclosure of information by political candidates and parties.

ISSUES

  • Whether the Election Commission should mandate candidates to disclose their criminal antecedents, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications.
  • whether the constitutionality and transparency of the electoral bonds scheme, which allows anonymous donations to political parties.

LEGAL PROVISINS

Article 324 of the Constitution of India: This article vests the power of superintendence, direction, and control of elections in India in the Election Commission.

Representation of the People Act, 1951: Sections 33A and 33B: These sections were added following a Supreme Court judgment and mandate candidates to file an affidavit declaring their criminal antecedents, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications.

Section 29C: This section requires political parties to submit annual reports to the Election Commission disclosing donations above a certain threshold.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT

The counsel for the petitioners, on 24.04.2024, drew our attention to a Wikipedia article which states that firmware is a software which provides low-level control of computing device hardware etc. It also states that programmable firmware memory can be reprogrammed via a procedure sometimes called flashing. Advocate for greater transparency in the electoral process to ensure that voters are well-informed about the candidates. Argued that non-disclosure of crucial information infringes upon the voters’ right to make an informed choice, a fundamental aspect of a democratic process. Challenged the electoral bonds scheme as it allows anonymous donations, leading to a lack of transparency and potential corruption. During the course of hearing, our attention was drawn to Rule 49MA which permits an elector to raise a complaint regarding the mismatch between the name and symbol of the candidate shown on paper slip generated by the VVPAT and the vote cast on the ballot unit. Such elector is required to make a written declaration to the presiding officer.

CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS

The ECI maintained that it had taken steps towards increasing transparency but argued that certain limitations exist within the current legal framework. Defended the electoral bonds scheme as a measure to curb black money in elections, arguing that it provides a cleaner alternative to cash donations.

COURT’S ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT

We could have dismissed the present writ petitions by merely relying upon the past precedents and decisions of this Court which, in our opinion, are clear and lucid, and as repeated challenges based on suspicion and doubt, without any cogent material and data, are execrable and undesirable. However, we would like to put on record the procedure and safeguards adopted by the ECI to ensure free and fair elections and the integrity of the electoral process. For this purpose, we shall refer to and take on record the features of EVMs.14 Lastly, we would give two directions, and take on record suggestion(s) for consideration of the ECI. I also wish to observe that while maintaining a balanced perspective is crucial in evaluating systems or institutions, blindly distrusting any aspect of the system can breed unwarranted scepticism and impede progress. Instead, a critical yet constructive approach, guided by evidence and reason, should be followed to make room for meaningful improvements and to ensure the system’s credibility and effectiveness. Be it the citizens, the judiciary, the elected representatives, or even the electoral machinery, democracy is all about striving to build harmony and trust between all its pillars through open dialogue, transparency in processes, and continuous improvement of the system by active participation in democratic practices. Our approach should be guided by evidence and reason to allow space for meaningful improvements. By nurturing a culture of trust and collaboration, we can strengthen the foundations of our democracy and ensure that the voices and choices of all citizens are valued and respected. With each pillar fortified, our democracy stands robust and resilient. I conclude with the hope and trust that the system in vogue shall not fail the electorate and the mandate of the voting public shall be truly reflected in the votes cast and counted. empowered to adopt a flexible approach in such cases, acknowledging their far-reaching public interest ramifications. The writ petitions and all pending applications, including the applications for intervention, are disposed of in the above terms.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – HARIRAGHAVA JP

Click here to read the judgement

0

The Supreme Court directed the State Bank of India to file an affidavit in order to fully effectuate its judgement

Case title – Association of Democratic Reforms and Anr Vs Union of India and Ors

Case no. – Writ Petition (Civil) No 880 of 2017

Order on – March 18th, 2024

Quoram – Chief Justice of India Dr. D Y Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice B R Gavai, Justice J B Pardiwala, Justice Manoj Misra

Facts of the case

The Bench by its judgement dated February 15th 2024, held the electoral bond scheme introduced in 2018 to be unconstitutional. The Apex Court unanimously ruled to strike down the electoral bonds scheme of anonymous political funding and specified the disclosure of data on poll bonds purchased and redeemed with the effect from April 12, 2019 till the date of the verdict.

Court’s Analysis and Order

The Court while adjudicating the Miscellaneous Application Diary No 12580 of 2024 and Miscellaneous Application No 596 of 2024 made the following directions.

The Court in sub-paragraphs “b” and “c” of paragraph 221 of its judgment directed the State Bank of India to submit details of the Electoral Bonds purchased in the aforementioned period and Political Parties which have received contributions through Electoral Bonds.

The Court pointed out that the relief sought for pre-dating the point of disclosure could not be dealt under the said MA as it would amount to a substantive modification of the judgement.

The Court thereby held the MA to be unmaintainable and accordingly dismissed the same.

The Court further under MA No 596 of 2024 also stipulated to comprehend the alphanumeric number and serial number of the Electoral Bonds which were purchased and redeemed.

The Counsel Mr Harish N Salve appearing on behalf of the SBI submitted that there is no reservation on the part of the SBI in disclosing all details which are in its possession and custody.

The Court in order to fully effectuate its judgment and to obviate any controversy in the future, directed the Chairman and the Managing Director of SBI to file an affidavit on or before 21 March 2024 indicating that SBI has disclosed all details of the Electoral Bonds which are in its possession and custody and that no details have been withheld from disclosure in terms of the directions contained in paragraph 221 of the judgment dated 15 February 2024.

The Court, thereby, directed the Election Commission of India to upload the details on receipt of the communication by SBI.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – Keerthi K

Click here to view the Judgement