Please read the following repeatedly: “Probing the Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP for accepting foreign funds uncalled for By Bishwajit Bhattacharyya Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India (As published in Economic Times) The reported inquiry against a debutant political party for allegedly accepting foreign contributions is curious. Section 4 (1) (e) of the Foreign Contribution Act, 1976 (FCA) says that no foreign contribution shall be accepted by any political party. As per Section 2 (c) of FCA, a foreign contribution has to have a foreign source. And a foreign source, as per Section 2 (e) of FCA, does not include a citizen of India. So, any foreign inward remittance made from abroad by an Indian citizen is not hit by FCA. Then, what is this demand for an inquiry against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) all about? Is it a case of any foreign government or an international agency pumping money into AAP? If it is so, what is there to inquire about? Under the FCA, proceedings can be initiated immediately. If, on the other hand, only Indian citizens resident abroad have been remitting money, then the allegation is bogus. Either way, a non-issue is being presented as a real one. The reason is obvious. Elections are round the corner. The ground under the feet of those firmly entrenched in the seat of power is turning shaky. Major political parties are becoming increasingly cagey* as the election in Delhi approaches. In todays dismal ethics in public life, the game of hitting below the belt has commenced. (*avoiding definite answer ; not being frank) If at all an inquiry is required to be instituted, no political party should be spared, otherwise it would appear as if a motivated exercise is being carried out. Any motivated exercise of power by the establishment would have a tellingly adverse impact on election results. That Indias electorates are mature has been proved time and again. Apart from being a self-defeating exercise, any inquiry on such non issues would further dampen the investment climate in India. Every foreign inward remittance through the banking channel would be viewed with suspicion. Bankers would be wary of affording credit in the ordinary course of business and may well credit suspense account pending inquiry. Today, at least the banking system at the operational level is working efficiently. There are no allegations that, like bureaucrats, bankers specialise in delaying or deferring decisions. But tomorrow we may well see that happen if a sense of fear is instilled in the mind of a banker at the operating level. Those in power making threatening statements of inquiry on foreign contributions would do well to go grasp the scope, purport and ambit of FCA carefully. Section 8 stipulates that nothing contained in Section 4 shall apply to the acceptance by any political party of any foreign contribution, where such contribution is accepted by him by way of remittance received, in the ordinary course of business, through any official channel or any authorised dealer in foreign exchange. We should remember it is Section 4 that imposes the prohibition on a political party on accepting a foreign contribution. So, any foreign contribution automatically goes out from the purview of prohibition if it is received in the ordinary course of business. However, there is a caveat. Section 10 overrides Section 8. And what does Section 10 say? It empowers the central government to prohibit any person from accepting any foreign contribution subject to the satisfaction of the central government that acceptance of such foreign contribution would harm the sovereignty and integrity of India. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the central government cannot act like a dictator contrary to the mandate of Parliament articulated through FCA. In any event, the overriding requirement of applicability of FCA is that it cannot apply to any contribution made by an Indian citizen, wherever he or she may be based physically across the world. In India, we have been witnessing scam after scam without the guilty being identified or dealt with. Real issues are being hidden and non-issues are hitting the headlines to divert attention. What an irony!” May I add, Both the Congress party and the BJP are major culprits in hiding around 80% of their donations from being exposed to the glare, taking shelter under the irrelevant provisions of I T Act that they need not disclose to the IT Authorities source of their funds received for less than Rs. 20000/- each. This cannot come to their rescue because they must and should disclose the source of each remittance with full/all details of the donors to their coffers, even if it is for as small as one paise, for the scrutiny of the public. Otherwise they should be spurned out of existence. Other established parties like JD(U)s, JD(S)s, AlADMK, DMK, CPI, CPI(M) and what-not, regardless of their size, deserve no better treatment. If they do not disclose they are to be treated as declared offenders and marauders of worst kind. The only party, AAP, which has published in its website, list of ALL their donors , should be supported. If asked, between Congress and BJP, which is better, my reply is, and yours as well should inescapably be, that the Congress is the worst. Please request friends and relatives at Delhi to vote for AAP. Vote for AAP for ushering in a change for better, for the betterment of our Nation and future of all our children and our grand children. I am 80+.
Posted on: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 06:40:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015