Let SBI not be selective in disclosure, the bench said.
The Supreme Court today mandated the State Bank of India (SBI) to reveal all information regarding electoral bonds that allowed both individuals and companies to contribute to political parties. Chaired by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, a five-judge bench has underscored the importance of transparency, instructing the SBI to disclose the electoral bond numbers, a crucial security aspect of these bonds.
During the hearing of a petition highlighting the “incomplete data” provided by the SBI on political donations via electoral bonds, CJI Chandrachud said, “We want all information to the electoral bonds to be disclosed which is in your possession. Every bit of information should come out. All details should come out. We want to ensure that nothing has been suppressed.”
Let SBI not be selective in disclosure, the bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, emphasised.
The court also directed the SBI to submit an affidavit affirming that no details have been withheld by March 21 and asked the Election Commission to upload the details given by the SBI on its website.
Last month, the court invalidated the scheme and mandated the bank to reveal all donation details from the past five years. Expressing dissatisfaction with the SBI”s response, the Supreme Court had issued a notice, citing inadequacies in the electoral bond data provided.
CJI Chandrachud remarked on the SBI”s approach, “The SBI”s attitude seems to be “you tell us what to disclose, we will disclose”. That does not seem to be fair. When we say “all details”, it includes all conceivable data.”
The SBI had faced criticism for its failure to establish a clear connection between the donors and recipients of electoral bonds. The court mandated the bank to disclose the bond “numbers” to address this issue.
However, during the proceedings, lawyer Harish Salve, representing the SBI, offered an explanation as to why the data provided by the bank didn”t directly link donors with their recipients. He said that the purchase and redemption data of electoral bonds were maintained in two distinct files, adhering to the requirement of anonymity imposed on the bank.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, said that the primary objective behind formulating the electoral bonds scheme was to combat the menace of black money in political funding.
Mehta raised concerns about a “witch-hunt” following the disclosure of details to the scheme. He pointed out the emergence of certain social media posts aimed at causing embarrassment, urging the court to intervene and provide direction on this matter.
In response to Mehta”s plea, CJI DY Chandrachud said: “As judges, we are only on the rule of law and work as per the Constitution. Our court is only to work for the governance of the rule of law in this polity. As judges, we are also discussed in social media but our shoulders are broad enough to take this. We are only enforcing our directions of judgment.”
