Even though the data on electoral bonds to be submitted by the State Bank of India (SBI) to the Election Commission by Tuesday will not “match” donors and recipients, petitioners in the case as well as activists are suitably enthused. They feel that the data on who purchased a particular bond at what point of time can be collated with other data available in public domain to draw “supporting conclusions”.
Key facts like the names of companies and individuals that bought the bonds, dates of their purchase, as well as the denominations of the bonds bought can give crucial information regarding whether there was any quid pro quo regarding policymaking, whether “shell companies” are involved, and whether any coercion was used to garner the funding, the activists say.
“There are enough data scientists in India who can draw supporting conclusions from these details,” Sanjay Hegde, who appeared for an intervener in the case, told The Hindu.
“Who purchased what bond at what point of time can be collated with other data which is available in public domain like whether the donor received any favour, if the donor is a subsidiary or a “shell” company controlled by an industrial house which benefited”, he added.
On Monday, the Supreme Court dismissed a plea filed by the SBI seeking an extension till June 30 for disclosure of the data on electoral bonds. The apex court asked that the data be submitted to the EC by Tuesday. The poll body in turn has to publish the information on its website by 5 p.m. on March 15.
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), which is the chief petitioner in the case, says there are huge possibilities and the information that can be deduced will depend on the data being revealed.
“As soon we see the data, we promise we will do an analysis,” Trilochan Shastry, chairperson of ADR, said.
Jagdeep Chhokar, founder-member of the ADR, says that there will be two data sets regarding the details of the buyers and the parties who encashed the electoral bonds. “The important point to note here is that that the scheme says that there cannot be a gap of more than 15 days between the buying and encashing of a bond”.
Activists feel that the SBI created a “red herring” by saying they would match the data as the Supreme Court had not asked for it in the February 15 order. “The very fact that they do not want the details to come out shows that they have something to hide,” one of the petitioners said.
