CONTENTS
- The Verdict on Electoral Bonds
- Strengthening Legal Education
The Verdict on Electoral Bonds
Context:
Donations of substantial value made anonymously can erode the foundations of electoral democracy and governance by fostering a culture of quid pro quo between donors and recipients. The Supreme Court of India, in invalidating the Electoral Bond Scheme (EBS), where individuals could purchase electoral bonds for political parties, has acknowledged this issue, and declared the entire scheme unconstitutional, particularly highlighting its infringement on voters’ right to information.
Relevance:
GS2-
- Transparency and Accountability
- Government Policies and Interventions
- Elections
- Issues Arising Out of Design and Implementation of Policies
Mains Question:
Discussing the details of the Electoral Bond Scheme, explain the Supreme Court’s rationale behind declaring the scheme unconstitutional. (15 Marks, 250 Words).
About the Electoral Bonds Scheme:
- The electoral bonds system was introduced in 2017 through a Finance bill and came into effect in 2018.
- They provide a means for individuals and entities to contribute to registered political parties while maintaining the anonymity of the donor.
Features:
- The State Bank of India (SBI) issues the bonds in denominations of Rs 1,000, Rs 10,000, Rs 1 lakh, Rs 10 lakh, and Rs 1 crore.
- They are payable to the bearer on demand and are interest-free.
- They can be purchased by Indian citizens or entities established in India, either individually or jointly with others.
- They remain valid for 15 calendar days from the date of issue.
Authorized Issuer:
SBI is the designated issuer, and electoral bonds are issued through specified SBI branches.
Eligibility of Political Parties:
Only political parties registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and those securing not less than 1% of the votes polled in the last general election to the House of the People or the Legislative Assembly are eligible to receive electoral bonds.
Purchase and Encashment:
- Electoral Bonds can be acquired digitally or through cheques.
- Encashment is permitted only through an authorized bank account of the political party.
Transparency and Accountability:
- Parties are required to disclose their bank account details with the Election Commission of India (ECI).
- Donations are conducted through banking channels, ensuring transparency.
- Political parties are obligated to provide an account of how the funds received are utilized.
More on the Supreme Court’s Verdict:
- The court deemed the amendment to the Companies Act, removing the 7.5% cap on a company’s profit that could be donated to political parties without disclosing recipient details in profit and loss accounts, as manifestly arbitrary.
- Since 2019, the court has mandated the disclosure of donation details. This judgment aligns with the court’s ongoing efforts to safeguard voter rights and maintain the integrity of elections, building on past interventions such as introducing the ‘None of the Above‘ option on the ballot, eliminating protection for legislators against immediate disqualification upon criminal conviction, and enforcing the mandatory disclosure of candidates’ assets and criminal history in election affidavits, along with expediting trials for criminal offenses involving MPs and MLAs.
- The Court’s rationale is entirely acceptable. It determined that the main justification for the Electoral Bond Scheme (EBS) – the restriction of ‘black money’ in political or electoral funding by permitting donations through banking channels – did not meet the proportionality test, as it was not the least restrictive means to limit voters’ right to information.
- The court established a logical connection between unidentified corporate donations and the potential influence of donors on policy decisions.
- This judgment is a natural extension of a principle established years ago, asserting that voters’ freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a) is incomplete without access to information about a candidate’s background.
- The principle is now broadened to unveil corporate donors who may have supported ruling parties in exchange for favors.
Conclusion:
While the decision may diminish the influence of donors on governance through financial power, a pertinent question arises about whether the scheme’s validity could have been determined earlier or the regular issuance of bonds could have been halted. The actual impact of the substantial funds given to parties under this scheme, and whether they influenced favorable policy measures or supported additional campaign resources, will remain unknown. This case was a fitting scenario for the temporary suspension of the scheme.
Strengthening Legal Education
Context:
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice has recently presented a significant report on legal education, proposing several groundbreaking recommendations to enhance the quality of legal education in India. Unlike fields such as medicine and engineering, legal education has not been a primary focus for India’s policymakers since Independence.
Relevance:
GS2- Issues Relating to Development and Management of Social Sector/Services relating to Education.
Mains Question:
Since Independence, legal education, unlike medicine and engineering, has not been a top priority for India’s policymakers. Comment. Also, suggest a way forward strategy to improve the quality of legal education in India. (15 Marks, 250 Words).
Evolution of Legal Education in India:
- Positive developments began to unfold in the 1990s with the establishment of national law universities (NLUs) in India.
- Fueled by the forces of liberalization and globalization, the 1990s presented numerous new opportunities for lawyers in the Indian economy. Consequently, many bright students started opting for law studies immediately after completing school.
- Numerous NLU graduates secured well-paying positions in prestigious law firms, while others pursued further studies abroad at renowned universities, earning prestigious scholarships like Rhodes and Chevening.
Status of Legal Education in India:
- However, the situation is less optimistic for hundreds of other law schools across the country, often characterized as a “sea of institutionalized mediocrity.”
- Despite attracting talented students, most NLUs have struggled to establish themselves as centers of excellence in legal research.
- This is evident in the fact that only two Indian law schools, Jindal Global Law School and the National Law School of India University, are included in the QS rankings of the top 250 law schools worldwide.
A New Regulator National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER):
- In light of these circumstances, a crucial suggestion from the committee is to curtail the authority of the Bar Council of India (BCI) in overseeing legal education.
- The BCI’s role in overseeing legal education related to obtaining fundamental qualifications for practicing in the courts remains essential. However, various aspects of legal education, particularly at the post-graduate level, extend beyond litigation.
- The committee rightfully proposes that the regulation of these aspects of legal education should be delegated to an independent entity known as the National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER). This envisioned body will establish high-quality standards to govern legal education.
- Distinguished legal scholars who provided testimony before the parliamentary committee advocated for the establishment of the NCLER.
- In addition to judges and practicing lawyers, the NCLER should include eminent law professors with an impeccable record of research and contributions to legal education.
Strengthening Research:
- The majority of India’s 1,700 law schools primarily concentrate on teaching, often neglecting research.
- Consequently, India tends to be a consumer rather than a producer of legal knowledge, relying heavily on Western-generated information.
- An indicative fact highlighting this is that, out of over 800 law journals globally indexed in Scopus (an internationally recognized database listing leading journals in all fields), only a few are Indian law journals. This underscores the significantly inadequate level of research conducted in India’s law schools.
- The committee underscores the importance of prioritizing and fostering research in legal education, asserting that it will result in improved teaching outcomes and aid students in cultivating a critical perspective.
- As Albert Einstein noted, “The value of a college education is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think.”
- To enhance research, there is a necessity to attract “world-class global faculty who are top researchers.” While this is a challenging endeavor, the committee’s recognition of this aspect is a positive development.
- Acknowledging the impact of globalization on legal education, the committee suggests that enhancing the research ecosystem in law schools requires increased state funding. Strengthening research will also prepare India’s law schools to thrive in a globalizing world.
- The committee is mindful of the effects of globalization on legal education and rightly recommends the development and implementation of a global curriculum, encouragement of student and faculty international exchange programs, inclusion of more international law courses in the curriculum, and heightened exposure for students to various legal systems.
Shifting Perspectives:
- The recommendations of the parliamentary committee bring a welcome change and offer encouragement to many law professors.
- While similar suggestions have been put forth previously in various forms, their effective implementation hinges on elevating higher education to a top priority for all.
- Moreover, reforming legal education requires two crucial elements.
- Firstly, leadership roles in university law faculties and law schools should be assumed by passionate, charismatic, and visionary academicians.
- Such leaders should inspire and foster an enabling and supportive environment that empowers younger academicians to realize their potential as exceptional educators and researchers.
- Unfortunately, with few exceptions, the deans of law faculties and vice-chancellors of law universities in India have generally failed to provide effective professional leadership.
- These flawed academic leaders often resist talented professors and act as significant impediments to achieving excellence.
- Monetary incentives or perks cannot compensate for this fundamental institutional deficiency.
- Secondly, to cultivate a culture of legal research in law schools, complete academic freedom and autonomy are imperative.
Conclusion:
As Jawaharlal Nehru aptly expressed, “a university stands for humanism, for tolerance, for reason, for the adventure of ideas and for the search of truth.” Achieving this objective in a law school or any academic institution is only possible if academicians are free to express their well-researched views without fear, even when these views diverge from widely held societal beliefs or challenge prevailing ideas. The intervention of the parliamentary committee is a positive development, and it is anticipated that all stakeholders will collaborate to enhance the quality of legal education in India.
