New Delhi, Oct 31 : Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan on Tuesday submitted before the Supreme Court that the electoral bond scheme violates the citizen's fundamental right to information about political parties. Citing previous judgements of the top court, Bhushan asserted that if the citizens have the right to know about candidates then they certainly have the right to know about who is funding the political party as well. A constitutional bench headed by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud and comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra are hearing the case. Appearing for a PIL filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), Bhushan explained in the court that the Electoral Bond scheme has introduced an opaque instrument. And because of this, nobody can come to know other than the government who contributed to whom. "The political party also may not know who has donated. It is open for the party to say - we opened our office in the morning and saw these 100 crores of bonds lying under our door. We deposited them, we don't know who gave them. These are bearer bonds." He further added that all that the political parties will have to disclose is that out of the total donations they received, they received Rs 500 crore by Electoral Bonds and the match of who purchased this bond and which party encashed can only be done by State Bank of India which comes under the Union government of India. "If at all, only a law enforcement agency, which are all controlled by the government or the government itself because it controls the state bank- can come to know. No one else can know this information...Not even the election commission can know. The parties aren't obliged to inform," Bhushan said in the court. He further pointed out that the government removed the limit of 7.5 per cent of the annual profit for companies. This means even a loss-making company or a company that does no business (a pure shell company) can also donate. "It defeats the people's right to be informed about the sources of funding of political parties. This is a fundamental right of citizens under Art 19(1)(a)," he submitted in the court. Bhushan asserted that Electoral Bonds promote corruption because there is good reason to believe that these bonds are being given by way of kickbacks to parties in power. Almost all bonds have been received by the party in power. "More than 50 per cent have been received only by the ruling party at the Centre and the rest have only been received by the ruling party in States...Not even 1 per cent has been received by opposition parties that aren't ruling in opposition states." Bhushan said in court. Bhushan further added that virtually all bonds have been purchased by corporates saying that nearly 95 per cent are in the denomination of 1 crore and above. He highlighted that the Centre through this scheme has also removed the cap on corporate donations and amended FCRA. "It destroys and disturbs democracy in the country. Because it does not allow a level playing field between political parties which are ruling versus opposition parties; or between political parties and independent candidates." The senior advocate also presented before the court that in the last five years since the electoral bonds scheme was introduced, the contribution to political parties by way of electoral bonds has far exceeded any other method. "The limit fixed per candidate is less than Rs 1 cr (Rs 95-75 lakh depending on the state). The total spent can be less than 500 crore in Lok Sabha. One party is getting more than 10 times the amount. Please see this is affecting our democracy," he said. Bhushan said there is circumstantial evidence to prove that kickbacks being paid by corporations via electoral bonds to political parties in ruling parties. It is astonishing that kickbacks have been legalised by this scheme, he said, quoting party-wise audit reports of electoral bonds received by the political parties. He said that the total donations declared by the BJP is more than three times the total donations declared by all other political parties put together. The court will presume to hear after the break. The top court is hearing the challenges to the constitutionality of the Electoral Bond scheme. Earlier, the Attorney General R. Venkataramani has submitted before the apex that the electoral bonds scheme floated by the Centre does not impinge upon any existing right of any person and cannot be said to be repugnant to any fundamental rights contained under Part III of the Constitution. In his brief submissions filed before the apex court, the top-most law officer of the Union government said that any law that is not repugnant to the fundamental rights of citizens cannot be voided for any other reason. He added that the judgments rendered by the apex court in the past cannot be read as to suggest that a citizen has a right to information under Art. 19(1)(a) regarding funding of political parties. /IANS