26 Mar 2021: Hindu Editorial Analysis

1) Here is why the electoral bonds scheme must go

It violates the basic tenets of India’s democracy by keeping the knowledge of the ‘right to know’ from citizens and voters.

GS-2: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

 

---

Context:

1. The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its order on a plea of a non-governmental organisation seeking a stay on the sale of fresh electoral bonds ahead of state assembly elections in West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Assam and the union territory of Puducherry.
2. The electoral bonds in design and operation, they allow for limitless and anonymous corporate donations to political parties. For this reason, they are deeply destructive of democracy, and violate core principles of the Indian Constitution.

 

The electoral bonds:

1. In 2017, the Finance Act was amended to implement electoral bond scheme under which bonds can be bought of any value in multiples of Rs 1000, Rs 10,000, Rs 1 lakh and Rs 1 crore from the SBI by anyone.
2. The name of the donar will not be there on the bond while the validity of the bond will be for 15 days. The eligible political parties---with more than one per cent voting share-can show it as the income from voluntary contributions for exemption from income tax.
3. Political parties registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which have secured not less than 1% of the votes in the last general election to an Assembly or Parliament, are eligible to open current accounts for redemption of electoral bonds.

 

The democracy must mean this:

1. When citizens cast their votes for the people who will represent them in Parliament, they have the right to do so on the basis of full and complete information.
2. There is no piece of information more important than the knowledge of who funds political parties.
3. Across democratic societies, and through time, it has been proven beyond doubt that money is the most effective way of buying policy, of engaging in regulatory capture, and of skewing the playing field in one’s own favour.
4.  This is enabled to a far greater degree when citizens are in the dark about the source of money: it is then impossible to ever know — or assess — whether a government policy is nothing more than a quid pro quo to benefit its funders.
5. The Indian Supreme Court has long held and rightly so that the “right to know”, especially in the context of elections, is an integral part of the right to freedom of expression under the Indian Constitution.
6. By keeping this knowledge from citizens and voters, the electoral bonds scheme violates fundamental tenets of our democracy.
7. It is equally important that if a democracy is to thrive, the role of money in influencing politics ought to be limited.
8. In many advanced countries, for example, elections are funded publicly, and principles of parity ensure that there is not too great a resource gap between the ruling party and the opposition.
9. The purpose of this is to guarantee a somewhat level playing field, so that elections are a battle of ideas, and not vastly unequal contests where one side’s superior resources enable it to overwhelm the other.
10. For this reason, in most countries where elections are not publicly funded, there are caps or limits on financial contributions to political parties.

 

A blow against democracy:

1. The electoral bonds scheme, however, removes all pre-existing limits on political donations, and effectively allows well-resourced corporations to buy politicians by paying immense sums of money.
2.  This defeats the entire purpose of democracy, which as B.R. Ambedkar memorably pointed out, was not just to guarantee one person, one vote, but one vote one value.
3. However, not only do electoral bonds violate basic democratic principles by allowing limitless and anonymous donations to political parties, they do so asymmetrically.
4.  Since the donations are routed through the State Bank of India, it is possible for the government to find out who is donating to which party, but not for the political opposition to know.
5. This, in turn, means that every donor is aware that the central government can trace their donations back to them.
6. Given India’s long-standing misuse of investigative agencies by whichever government occupies power at the Centre, this becomes a very effective way to squeeze donations to rival political parties, while filling the coffers of the incumbent ruling party.
7.  Statistics bear this out: while we do not know who has donated to whom, we do know that a vast majority of the immensely vast sums donated through multiple electoral cycles over the last three years, have gone to the ruling party.

 

 

Gaps in government’s defence:

1. The government has attempted to justify the electoral bonds scheme by arguing that its purpose is to prevent the flow of black money into elections,
2.  This justification falls apart under the most basic scrutiny, it is entirely unclear what preventing black money has to do with donor anonymity, making donations limitless, and leaving citizens in the dark.
3.  The electoral bonds scheme allows even foreign donations to political parties which can often be made through shell companies the prospects of institutional corruption including by foreign sources increases with the electoral bonds scheme, instead of decreasing.

 

The judiciary needs to act:

1. One of the most critical functions of an independent judiciary in a functioning democracy is to referee the fundamentals of the democratic process.
2.  Governments derive their legitimacy from elections, and it is elections that grant governments the mandate to pursue their policy goals, without undue interference from courts.
3.  The government itself cannot in good faith regulate the process that it itself is subject to every five years, the courts remain the only independent body that can adequately umpire and enforce the ground rules of democracy.
4. It is for this reason that courts must be particularly sensitive to and cognisant of laws and rules that seek to skew the democratic process and the level playing field, and that seek to entrench one-party rule over multi-party democracy.
5. There is little doubt that in intent and in effect, the electoral bonds scheme is guilty of both. Thus, it deserves to be struck down by the courts as unconstitutional.
6.  The conduct of the Supreme Court so far has been disappointing. The petition challenging the constitutional validity of the electoral bonds scheme was filed in 2018.
7. The case, which is absolutely vital to the future health of Indian democracy, has been left unheard for three years. The Supreme Court’s inaction in this case is not neutral,
8. It is a matter of some optimism that a start was finally made when the Court heard the application for stay before this round of elections.

 

Conclusion:

1. The right to know has long been enshrined as a part of the right to freedom of expression under constitution; furthermore, uncapping political donations and introducing a structural bias into the form of the donations violate both the guarantee of equality before law, as well as being manifestly arbitrary.
2. The pleas argued that it legitimized electoral corruption at a huge scale, while at the same time ensuring complete non-transparency in political funding. The challenge to those amendments via Finance Act is still pending.
3. One can only hope that the Supreme  Court will stay the scheme so that it does not further distort the coming round of elections, and then proceed to hear and decide the full case, in short order.

 

2) Remove the wedges in India-Bangladesh ties

Small but important steps can put an end to the long-standing issues in a relationship that is gradually coming of age.

GS-2: GS: International relations /India and its neighborhood- relations.

 

Context:

1. The friendship between India and Bangladesh is historic, evolving over the last 50 years. Political stability and policy continuity have helped Delhi and Dhaka deepen bilateral ties over the last decade. In contrast, political cycles in Delhi and Islamabad have rarely been in sync.
2. Bangladesh’s Declaration of Independence from Pakistan 50 years ago and positive changes in India’s relations with Pakistan has been elusive, including the different trajectories of India’s eastern and north-western frontiers.

 

Now it is about cooperation:

1. The relationship remained cordial until the assassination of Bangladesh’s founding President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in August 15, 1975, followed by a period of military rule and the rise of General Ziaur Rahman who became President and also assassinated in 1981.
2.  It thawed again between (1982-1991)  when a military led government by General H.M. Ershad ruled the country. Since Bangladesh’s return to parliamentary democracy in 1991, relations have gone through highs and lows.
3. However, in the last decade, India-Bangladesh relations have warmed up, entering a new era of cooperation, and moving beyond historical and cultural ties to become more assimilated in the areas of trade, connectivity, energy, and defence.

 

Bangladesh and India Achievement:

1. Bangladesh and India have achieved the rare feat of solving their border issues peacefully by ratifying the historic Land Boundary Agreement in 2015, where enclaves were swapped allowing inhabitants to choose their country of residence and become citizens of either India or Bangladesh.
2. Bangladesh today is India’s biggest trading partner in South Asia with exports to Bangladesh in FY 2018-19 at $9.21 billion and imports at $1.04 billion.
3.  India has offered duty free access to multiple Bangladeshi products. Trade could be more balanced if non-tariff barriers from the Indian side could be removed.
4. On the development front, cooperation has deepened, with India extending three lines of credit to Bangladesh in recent years amounting to $8 billion for the construction of roads, railways, bridges, and ports.
5.  However, in eight years until 2019, only 51% of the first $800 million line of credit has been utilised whilst barely any amount from the next two lines of credit worth $6.5 billion has been mobilised.
6. Bangladesh accounts for more than 35% of India’s international medical patients and contributes more than 50% of India’s revenue from medical tourism.
7. India and Bangladesh share 4096.7 km. of border, which is the longest land boundary that India shares with any of its neighbours and security is very much impotent.
8.  The much-awaited railway line between Agartala to Akhaura in Bangladesh will be completed by Sept 2021 and the process for acquisition of land and handing it over to the executing agency in both the countries has been completed.
9.  The 15.6 km-long Agartala-Akhaura railway link connects Gangasagar in Bangladesh to Nischintapur in India and from Nischintapur to Agartala railway station.
10.  India and Bangladesh share 54 common rivers. A bilateral Joint Rivers Commission (JRC) has been working since June 1972 to maintain liaison between the two countries to maximize benefits from common river systems,
11. Highlighted that regional organisations such as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) have an important role to play.

 

The connectivity boost:

1. Recently, a 1.9 kilometre long bridge, the Maitri Setu, was inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, connecting Sabroom in India with Ramgarh in Bangladesh.
2. Three landlocked states of India viz. Assam, Meghalaya and Tripura will get access to open sea trade routes from Chattogram and Mongla ports via Indian ports.
3. Tripura will be connected  to Chattogram Port through the Maitree Setu on Feni river at Sabroom in South Tripura and Ramgarh in Bangladesh. While Agartala is 135 kms from Sabroom, Chattogram port is 75 kms from Sabroom.
4. Cargo transportation through IBP waterway route from Kolkata/ Haldia to North East is limited to 2000 ton vessels. Now, larger ships carrying cargo destined for North East can call at Chattogram and Mongla ports thereby increasing trade volumes and reducing logistic costs.
5. Bangladesh allows the shipment of goods from its Mongla and Chattogram (Chittagong) seaports carried by road, rail, and water ways to Agartala (Tripura) via Akhura; Dawki (Meghalaya) via Tamabil; Sutarkandi (Assam) via Sheola, and Srimantpur (Tripura) via Bibirbazar. This allows landlocked Assam, Meghalaya and Tripura to access open water routes through the Chattogram and Mongla ports

 

Bones of contention:

1. Despite the remarkable progress, the unresolved Teesta water sharing issue looms large. Border killings are yet to stop. India not only has failed to stop the border killings but at times has even justified them.
2. The year 2020 saw the highest number of border shootings by the Border Security Force. The shots are fired at civilians, usually cattle traders, who are usually unarmed, trying to illegally cross the border.
3. The government’s proposal to implement the National Register of Citizens across the whole of India reflects poorly on India-Bangladesh relations.
4.  It remains to be seen how India addresses the deportation of illegal Muslim immigrants, some of whom claim to have come from Bangladesh.

 

Keeping the momentum going

1. Sri Lanka, Nepal and the Maldives, once considered traditional Indian allies, are increasingly tilting towards China due to the Asian giant’s massive trade, infrastructural and defence investments in these countries.
2. India-Bangladesh relations have been gaining positive momentum over the last decade. As Bangladesh celebrates its 50 years of independence on March 26, 1971, India continues to be one of its most important neighbours and strategic partners.
3. As the larger country, the onus is on India to be generous enough to let the water flow and ensure that people are not killed on the border for cattle even if it is illegal when there are appropriate means for justice.

 

Conclusion:

1. India ‘Neighbourhood First Policy’ has been losing its influence in the region to China. Bhutan also does not abide by Indian influence as evinced by its withdrawal from the BBIN (Bhutan-Bangladesh-India-Nepal) motor vehicles agreement.
2.  China, in lieu of its cheque-book diplomacy, is well-entrenched in South Asia, including Bangladesh, with which it enjoys significant economic and defence relations.
3. The small but important steps can remove long-standing snags in a relationship which otherwise is gradually coming of age in 50 years. To make the recent gains irreversible, both countries need to continue working on the three Cs — cooperation, collaboration, and consolidation.