The Aryavarth Express
Agency(New Delhi): Rajya Sabha member Kapil Sibal labeled the State Bank of India’s (SBI) justification for postponing the revelation of electoral bond particulars as “childish.” Sibal, who spearheaded the petitioner’s arguments in the Supreme Court against the electoral bond scheme, argued that it is paramount for the Supreme Court to maintain its honor, especially when the bank’s request comes after a definitive judgement by a Constitution bench. He dismissed the bank’s claim that compiling the data would require several weeks as a transparent attempt to shield the government, spotlighting this stance in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s review by a five-judge Constitution bench. This bench is tasked with considering SBI’s petition for an extension to unveil the details of electoral bonds redeemed by political factions prior to the scheme’s annulment.
Sibal voiced his concern that making these details public close to election time would inevitably lead to public discourse, suggesting that the SBI’s plea for more time was a deliberate attempt to obscure these revelations. He criticized the bank’s rationale as antiquated in the digital age, emphasizing the inherent responsibility of the Supreme Court to safeguard its standing by not yielding to the SBI’s seemingly insubstantial explanations.
Regarding the plea for contempt action against the SBI for not adhering to the Supreme Court’s directives, Sibal opined that the adjudication of contempt should remain within the judiciary’s purview, underlining the importance of the court’s role in upholding its esteem against baseless arguments.
Sibal also commented on the Supreme Court’s decision to declare electoral bonds unconstitutional, lamenting that despite this ruling, the level playing field in politics remains unaddressed. He critiqued the electoral bond scheme as a political strategy aimed at financially empowering the BJP, and expressed apprehensions about potential misuse of enforcement agencies against opposition parties once the bond details are disclosed.
He concluded by stressing the importance of a unified opposition in challenging the government on the issue of electoral bonds, highlighting the significance of this matter in the upcoming elections and expressing hope that the Supreme Court will adhere to its initial directives.
This discourse emerges in the backdrop of the Supreme Court’s directive to dismantle the anonymous political funding scheme and its mandate for the SBI to furnish details of electoral bonds to the Election Commission for public disclosure, juxtaposed with the bank’s subsequent plea for an extension.
