I do not agree with Ritesh Sharma’s view below ⬇️
I think what PM Modi really meant was that ordinary people who were able to make anonymously small contributions to political parties in India under the Electoral Bond Scheme EBS have now lost that means of exercising even a modicum of popular influence on political life in India as a result of the Supreme Court’s sweeping decision to outlaw the Scheme.
I think we must all have to wait for the SBI disclosure of how much of the ₹.16k crore received from EBS was from corporates and how much from individuals / non-corporates . If the population of the latter group is even a tenth of the total , then the Sudama metaphor used by PM Modi wouldn’t be all that inaccurate or inappropriate.
Sir, in my opinion , the SC verdict would’ve been welcomed by all people if only the 5 judge bench had ruled that the EBS would stay but it would not be available anymore for corporate bodies but only for common tax-paying individual citizens of the country. Any citizen of India who wanted to show support to a political party of his choice was free to donate Bonds to the party with total anonymity simply on the strength of his Aadhar card and PAN shown at the SBI counter. But corporate bodies would not be able to use EBS to make such political donations except through ETS — Electoral Trust Schemes over which the ECI — Election Commission of India — would have oversight. Please read this OpEd by Sri N Gopalaswamy former CEC : https://theprint.in/opinion/sc-ruling-on-bon…-still-untouched/1970506/
Make corporates fund through ETS only with ECI oversight.
It won’t harm the country too much to enable individuals free to donate without any limit and anonymously too under EBS but only against proof of identity and tax-residence (Aadhar and PAN) …. And with only SBI maintaining banking secrecy over bonds sold to such individual citizens. Only CAG must be granted the power to call for disclosure, if necessary, of the EB bonds sold to such individuals by SBI, again under strict privilege rules, and that too only once annually as mere routine audit submission.
Offshore Foreign entities and all other onshore shell corporate entities will thus be effectively debarred from flooding the electoral system with unaccounted or laundered cash . Corruption will not be eliminated I concede but at least greatly reduced by ridding corporate greed and money power taking over election systems and processes,
If the judgment had been given along those lines, the Sudamas of our country would’ve been given a voice at last to assert themselves in the way politics of India and elections are to be conducted .
The Indian Judiciary seems to have no bold imagination at all and, IMHO, it has missed a golden opportunity to nudge the Legislature in the direction of reforming the EBS to empower the common citizen.
Regards ,
Sudarshan Madabushi
Sent from my iPhone
On 20-Feb-2024, at 7:39 AM, Rangarajan T.N.C. <@yahoo.com> wrote:
Lord Krishna, Sudama and Supreme Court
Today, Prime Minister Modi made a statement involving a metaphor of Lord Krishna and Sudama. While the metaphor was intended to illustrate the perception of corruption in our society, it’s important to consider the implications of such remarks.
The anecdote of Sudama giving rice to Lord Krishna is used to emphasise how actions can be misinterpreted in modern times. However, using such a cultural reference to critique the judiciary raises concerns. It’s essential to respect the autonomy and authority of our judiciary system, which plays a pivotal role in maintaining law and order in our society.
In my view, such comment could potentially undermine the Supreme Court’s authority and its interpretations in the eyes of common man. Such statement, especially following the Supreme Court’s judgment on election bonds, can be perceived adversely. This undermines the balance of power that is fundamental to our democracy.We must remember that every institution, including the judiciary, plays a vital role in our society. It’s crucial to uphold their dignity and respect their function, rather than undermining them with public remarks.
—————————————-Below is the newsreport—————-
—————————————-Below is the newsreport—————-
Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday made a veiled reference to the Supreme Court days after its judgment on electoral bonds.
Addressing a gathering in Uttar Pradesh’s Sambhal on the occasion of laying the foundation stone of Shri Kalki Dham, PM Modi hailed expelled Congress leader Acharya Pramod Krishnan.
While drawing parallels with the encounter between Lord Krishna and his friend Sudama from Hindu mythology, the prime minister said,”He (Acharya Pramod Krishnam) said that everyone has something to give but I have nothing, I can only express my feelings.
“Pramod ji, it is good that you did not give me anything, otherwise the times have changed in such a way that if in today’s era, Sudama would give rice to Shri Krishna and the video would come out, a PIL would be filed in the Supreme Court and the judgment would come that something was given to Lord Krishna in corruption and Lord Krishna was doing corruption. It is better that you expressed your feelings and did not give anything,” ANI quoted the PM as saying.