Electoral bonds are a double-edged sword, providing anonymity to donors while raising concerns about transparency in political funding. To what extent have electoral bonds further legitimized opacity in electoral funding?

Electoral bond is an instrument to fund political party in an anonymous way. Positives of it: (1) An instrument to prevent influence of donors on politics of political party. Anonymity is necessary. (2) Prevent black marketing and any parallel economy. Bonds on only be encashed within 15 days. (3) Clear account of customer/donor, through KFC means → transparency in political funding. (4) A convenient way → can be issued in sum, April, July, & October. Values like 1000, 10000, 100000 etc. Any individual or company can donate.

A double edged sword: (1) High anonymity, thus funds remain unshown to ECT. ADR Report says 40% funds given to party was from unknown sources. (25%) of which was from electoralond. (2) Removed the cap of 25% of weight of corporate that could be donated. (3) No compulsion on political party to disclose funds to ECF. Ojay Siryas Committee suggested state funding of election to eliminate all the vices pertaining to election funding.

— Anjali Ajay Thakur · AIR 43