New Delhi, Mar 24 (IANS): The Supreme Court on Wednesday threw a volley of questions at the Centre, about the mechanism to stop Electoral Bonds from being used for illegal purposes like terrorism, and also how could they curtail flow of black money in elections.
A bench, headed by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, asked Attorney General K.K. Venugopal, about "the misuse of funds for illegal purposes, for terrorism. We would like you as a government to look into it. It is not to suggest that political parties have violence on their agenda".
The AG sought to clarify that the bonds are purchased through either demand drafts or cheques, and it is white money going through banking channels. Terrorism is not funded by white money, he stressed.
But the bench, also comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, continued to pose queries, asking if "somebody buy bonds and fund terrorist operations, as there could a political party, which is qualified for the bonds and have violence on their agenda".
"We are sure there are political parties who have violence on their agenda. Can not a political party fund terrorist operation?"
The bench, however, added that it does not intend to get into politics, or make any comment on any political party, but can't a party receive bonds and then fund a protest which turns violent.
The Chief Justice specifically asked Venugopal on how the government can control what use the money is put to.
At this, the AG said the political parties, which were registered under the Representation of Peoples Act and had secured not less than one per cent vote, in the last general election, can encash the bonds received as donations from the SBI.
He added that after 15 days, these bonds become mere paper.
The bench also asked: "If there is a political party, which buys Electoral Bonds worth Rs 100 crore, what is the control that it will use this Rs 100 crore for only political purpose and not for illegal activity or fund violence?"
On the aspect of anonymity, the bench also sought explanation from the AG on how the bonds help in curtailing the use of black money in elections. Venugopal replied that the bonds were introduced to counter funnelling of black money by political parties in elections, and cannot be bought with black money at all. Also, no trading of bonds is allowed, he added.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that a person could buy bonds only after complying with KYC norms.
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the Election Commission, said: "We are supporting Electoral Bonds and not opposing it."
He added that if bonds are not allowed, then, there will be a return to the era when there were unaccounted deposits and least accountability. He emphasised that the poll body wanted transparency in the entire process.
After a detailed hearing in the matter, the top court reserved its judgment on a plea filed by NGO Association for Democratic Reforms seeking stay on further sale of Electoral Bonds before the upcoming Assembly polls in five states.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the NGO, vehemently argued that for the time being, the sale of Electoral Bonds should be stopped.
At this, the bench said: "If your argument is correct, we have to strike down the law in full." The AG also informed the top court that Election Commission has given permission for opening sale of Electoral Bonds between April 1 to 10.