Political funding secrecy
Parties have ensured they stay above the law
The Finance Bill, 2018, has slipped in an amendment to the Finance Act, 2016, which does a great disservice to the process towards transparency and accountability in governance and politics. For, the amendment in essence allows both the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress to escape legal scrutiny for receiving foreign contribution since 1976, the year FCRA regulations were introduced. It also legislatively overrules a Delhi High Court judgment that found that both the parties received funds in violation of the Foreign Currency Regulation Act (FCRA) in 2014. While the Finance Act, 2016, had extended the legalised period of foreign contribution to 2010, thereby giving the political parties a leeway of six years, the Finance Bill, 2018, wants to take it back all the way to 1976.
It is disappointing that an Act which does not even exist anymore (the FCRA has been repealed and re-enacted as the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010) is being amended by the government to evade a judicial indictment of not just the BJP but also that of all political parties. Equally strange is the role of the Congress, which has gone along with this move since it is an equal beneficiary, and the silence of the party comes at a time when its president Rahul Gandhi is repeatedly attacking the government over lack of transparency in the Rafale aircraft deal.
The double standard of political parties is all too evident. While the common man is — rightly — being pushed towards complete transparency in financial transactions, no such demand is being placed on political parties as far as electoral finances are concerned. The grave irony of the government legalising illegal foreign funding of political parties also lies in the enormous crackdown on foreign funds and aids received by non-government organisations. It’s true that successive governments have done little to remedy the situation, but the current regime had installed itself on a high pedestal. Unfortunately, its track record on this count at least has not been different.
There are enough examples of this: Soon after the announcement of demonetisation in 2016, the government lowered the cap for cash donations to political parties that would be out of the ambit of audit from ~20,000 to ~2,000. The socalled reform has remained a non-starter as the lower limit could be gamed just the way the higher cap was. Then, the 2017-18 Budget removed the cap on corporate donations to political parties but ensured complete secrecy about the donors. The decision to launch electoral bonds neither increased transparency about a political party’s funding, nor stopped the already existing ways — such as claiming to give multiple cash donations of ~1,999 each — of routing black money into political parties. Yet another example of treating political parties with kid gloves was the retrospective amendment of the FCRA in 2016.
The bottom line from a common man’s perspective remains simple: Regardless of what the political class says about removing corruption, it will ensure it stays above the law.