Electoral Bonds: FICCI, ASSOCHAM Move SC Against Alpha-numeric Codes' Disclosure

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi said that purchasers of the bonds had a legitimate expectation of confidentiality.

The development occurs in light of the SC asking the SBI to disclose all 'conceivable' details available with it regarding electoral bonds, including the alphanumeric number corresponding to each bond.

(Photo: Kamran Akhter/The Quint)

Industrial bodies FICCI and ASSOCHAM moved the Supreme Court on Monday, 18 March, against the proposed disclosure of the alpha-numeric numbers of electoral bonds, to the extent that these would reveal which companies made contributions to which political parties.

FICCI is the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry and ASSOCHAM is the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India.

The development occurred after the SC directed the State Bank of India (SBI) to disclose all 'conceivable' details available to it regarding electoral bonds, including the alphanumeric number corresponding to each bond.

“In the judgment, we had expressed asked the State Bank of India to disclose ‘all details.’ That includes the bond numbers as well. The bank cannot be selective in disclosing all details. Do not wait for the orders of this court.”

CJI Chandrachud

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of FICCI and ASSOCHAM, argued that the purchasers of the bonds had a legitimate expectation of confidentiality and the purchases were made on the basis of this assurance, and therefore, the direction for the disclosure of alpha-numerics numbers retrospectively applies a higher standard of disclosure.

The CJI responded to this by asserting that “with effect from April 12, 2019, we directed the collection of details. Everyone was put on notice at the time. This is why we did not ask [for] the disclosure of the bonds sold prior to this interim order. This was a conscious choice by this constitution bench.” 

[The Quint has reached out to FICCI and ASSOCHAM for further comments on the issue. The story will be updated as and when a response is received.]

When Advocate Rohatgi, tried to intervene on behalf of ASSOCHAM, FICCI and CII (Confederation of Indian Industry), and the CJI said that the application was not numbered and listed for hearing, and therefore, the SC would not entertain it out of turn.

Meanwhile, as per Live Law, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought safeguards against “social media commentary” on the electoral bonds data, arguing:

"How this court's judgment is playing out is something which it must be informed of. Now the witch-hunting has started at some other level, not at the government level. Those before the court have started giving press interviews deliberately embarrassing the court. A barrage of social media posts intended to cause embarrassment has started. Statistics can be twisted in any manner. Based upon twisted statistics, all kinds of posts are made. Would your lordships consider issuing a direction?"

To this, the CJI said that “as an institution, our (the SC's) shoulders are broad enough to deal with social media commentary. Our intent was disclosure…We are governed by a rule of law.”

The Quint is extensively investigating the electoral bonds data of the SBI made public by the Election Commission on 14 March. Follow our coverage here.