The central-ruling Modi regime has made an explosive statement in the Supreme Court that the citizens don't have the right to know the source of funding for the political parties. The statement has come when the apex court was hearing the constitutional validity of the electoral bonds in which the BJP has been a greater beneficiary. Now, the submission of Modi regime had exposed its aim of curbing the transparency of political funding through electoral bonds. 

Electoral bonds have become a significant funding platform to the political parties. They were introduced in 2017 and citizens and bodies in India can buy these bonds and donate anonymously to political parties. Ever since the inception of these bonds, the BJP has been a greater beneficiary as the party has received Rs 5,270 crore from 2018-2022, while the Congress and Trinamool Congress received Rs 964 crore and Rs 767 crore respectively. 

Challenging the opaqueness of these electoral bonds, several petitions were filed in the Supreme Court and they sought to challenge the constitutional validity of these bonds. The petitions are being heard by a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud and during the hearing, the Attorney General of India, representing the Modi administration, has filed a statement stating that the citizens don't have right to know the source of political funding. 

According to reports, Attorney General R Venkataramani argued that citizens don't have a general right to know everything. He said, "There can be no general right to know anything and everything without being subjected to reasonable restrictions. Secondly, the right to know as necessary for expression can be for specific ends or purposes and not otherwise." 

Defending the electoral bonds, the Attorney General said, "The scheme in question extends the benefit of confidentiality to the contributor. It ensures and promotes clean money being contributed. It ensures abiding by tax obligations. Thus, it does not fall foul of any existing right." "A constitutional court reviews state action only if it impinges upon existing rights and not because state action has not provided for a possible right or an expectation howsoever desirable", he added. 

Venkataramani further said, "That contribution to political parties has democractic significance and a fit subject for political debate and demand of governance accountability free from influences does not mean that the court will proceed to declare on such matters in the absence of a clear constitutionally offending law." 

On the other hand, the petitioners, including Congress leader Jaya Thakur and CPI(M), have argued that the finances of political parties should be made public just as the criminal antecedents of the candidates. However, Venkataramani said that the judgment on criminal antecedents cannot be extrapolated on electoral bonds and he also said, "Judicial review is not about scanning state policies for the purposes of suggesting better or different prescriptions." 

A five-judge bench consists of Chief Justice Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra has begun hearing the petitions against the electoral bonds on Tuesday - October 31 at a high time when the country is heading towards crucial election season.