The ongoing debate over the electoral bond scheme has escalated into a major political confrontation. The Congress party, India’s principal opposition, has called for the resignation of Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman after an FIR was filed against her in connection with the now-scrapped scheme. Accusing her of “undermining democracy,” the Congress has demanded a Supreme Court-monitored investigation into the case. This article delves into the controversy, the allegations, and the broader implications for Indian democracy.
Electoral Bonds and the Controversy
Electoral bonds, introduced by the government in 2018, were intended to bring transparency to political funding by replacing cash donations to political parties with bank-issued bonds. The scheme allowed donors to anonymously contribute to parties, with the stated goal of curbing black money in elections. However, from its inception, critics, including the Congress party, expressed concerns that the system lacked transparency and disproportionately benefited the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
In February 2024, the Supreme Court ruled the scheme unconstitutional, stating that it violated citizens’ right to information and posed a threat to free and fair elections. The apex court’s decision struck down the system, opening the floodgates for further scrutiny and political accusations.
The Allegations Against Nirmala Sitharaman
The current controversy stems from a complaint filed by Adarsh R. Iyer, co-president of the Janaadhikaara Sangharsha Parishath (JSP), a Karnataka-based advocacy group. The complaint alleges that Nirmala Sitharaman, along with senior BJP leaders and Enforcement Directorate officials, orchestrated an extortion racket through the electoral bond scheme, amassing over ₹8,000 crore in ill-gotten gains.
Based on these allegations, a Special Court for People’s Representatives in Bengaluru ordered the registration of an FIR against Sitharaman and others, including BJP Karnataka chief B.Y. Vijayendra and state party leader Nalin Kumar Kateel. They face charges under Sections 384 (extortion), 120B (criminal conspiracy), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. The court’s decision has intensified the political battle between the BJP and the opposition.
Congress’ Demands and Accusations
In a press briefing, senior Congress leaders Jairam Ramesh and Abhishek Singhvi launched a scathing attack on Sitharaman, accusing her of being complicit in a “massive corruption scheme.” Ramesh stated that the finance minister should immediately resign, as she is “guilty politically, legally, and morally.” He emphasized that her continued presence in office would undermine the integrity of the investigation.
Singhvi further amplified the party’s stance, referring to the scheme as “EBS – Extortionist BJP Scheme,” and accused the BJP of using electoral bonds to manipulate elections in their favor. According to Singhvi, the scandal threatens the foundational principle of free and fair elections. “The Finance Minister cannot do this on her own,” he remarked, implying that higher powers within the BJP were involved. He demanded a thorough investigation under the supervision of a Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT).
Wider Implications for Indian Democracy
This controversy has triggered a wider debate on the role of money in politics and the need for transparency in political funding. Electoral bonds were initially hailed as a reform to reduce cash donations, but critics argue that their implementation made elections more opaque. The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the scheme as unconstitutional marked a victory for advocates of transparency, but the political fallout continues to reverberate.
The Congress has framed the issue as a fundamental attack on democracy, with leaders like Singhvi arguing that free and fair elections are crucial to maintaining a level playing field in the political arena. Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah echoed these concerns, calling for Sitharaman’s resignation and demanding a report on the matter within three months. He pointedly questioned whether the BJP would take action against one of its most prominent leaders.
As the electoral bond controversy unfolds, it highlights the ongoing struggle over the influence of money in politics. While the Supreme Court’s verdict was a significant milestone, the FIR against Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has given the Congress fresh ammunition in its battle against the BJP. The demand for her resignation and a deeper investigation into the scheme suggest that the controversy is far from over. With both sides accusing each other of undermining democracy, the case could have far-reaching consequences for political accountability and transparency in India.
(With inputs from agencies)
