Electoral bonds are financial instruments that were introduced in India as a way to make political funding more transparent and curb the use of black money in political campaigns. The scheme was notified by the Government of India in January 2018 as a part of the Finance Act, 2017. Here are key points about electoral bonds:

1. Issuer: Electoral bonds are issued by authorized banks in India. As of my last knowledge update in September 2021, State Bank of India (SBI) is the only authorized bank to issue electoral bonds.
2. Denominations: Electoral bonds are available in specified denominations, ranging from INR 1,000 to INR 1 crore (Indian Rupees).
3. Eligibility: Any Indian citizen or body incorporated in India can purchase electoral bonds. However, they can be bought only through specified branches of the authorized bank.
4. Anonymity: One of the controversial aspects of electoral bonds is the anonymity provided to the donor. The donor's identity is kept confidential, and only the bank and the political party are aware of the donor's information.
5. Validity Period: Electoral bonds have a limited validity period during which they can be used. As of my last update, the bonds can be encashed by the political parties within 15 days.
6. Purpose: Electoral bonds are meant to be used for making donations to registered political parties. These bonds were introduced to bring transparency to political funding and reduce the use of unaccounted money in elections.
7. Criticism and Concerns: The scheme has faced criticism for the anonymity it provides to donors, as it raises concerns about potential misuse and lack of transparency in political funding. Critics argue that it goes against the principles of transparency in electoral financing.

Pros of Electoral Bonds:

1. Transparency for Political Parties: Electoral bonds were introduced to bring more transparency to political funding. By channeling donations through banking channels, it becomes easier to trace the flow of funds, reducing the likelihood of illegal or unaccounted-for money.
2. Encourages Legitimate Donations: The use of electoral bonds encourages legitimate and legal donations to political parties. Donors have to go through the banking system to purchase these bonds, which can contribute to cleaner and more accountable political funding.
3. Avoids Direct Cash Transactions: Electoral bonds help reduce the reliance on cash transactions for political donations. Cash transactions are often associated with corruption and the use of black money in politics.
4. Privacy for Donors: The anonymity feature of electoral bonds protects the privacy of donors. This is seen as a positive by some, as it shields donors from potential backlash or intimidation for supporting a particular political party.
5. Regulated by Banks: The issuance and redemption of electoral bonds are regulated by authorized banks, adding a layer of oversight to the process. This regulatory framework aims to ensure that the bonds are used for their intended purpose.

Cons of Electoral Bonds:

1. Anonymity Concerns: The anonymity provided to donors has been a major point of criticism. Critics argue that this lack of transparency can lead to potential misuse, with the possibility of illegal funds entering the political system without public knowledge.
2. Limited Oversight: While banks are involved in the issuance and redemption of electoral bonds, the overall system is criticized for its limited oversight. Critics argue that more robust mechanisms are needed to ensure accountability and prevent misuse.
3. Potential for Money Laundering: There are concerns that the anonymity of donors and the lack of stringent oversight could provide an avenue for money laundering. Without proper checks and balances, there is a risk that illicit funds could find their way into the political system.
4. Exclusion of Small Donors: The system of electoral bonds may favor larger donors who can afford to purchase these bonds in significant denominations. This could potentially exclude smaller donors from the political funding process.
5. Limited Impact on Black Money: While electoral bonds aim to reduce the use of black money in politics, critics argue that the impact might be limited. Without comprehensive reforms in political funding and more stringent monitoring, the problem of unaccounted-for money may persist.

There are several issues and concerns associated with the use of electoral bonds in India. While the scheme was introduced with the intention of bringing transparency to political funding, it has faced criticism for various reasons. Here are some of the key issues:

1. Anonymity of Donors: One of the most significant concerns is the anonymity provided to donors. While this is intended to protect the privacy of donors, it has raised questions about transparency. Critics argue that the lack of disclosure of donor identities undermines the principles of open and transparent political funding.
2. Potential for Money Laundering: The anonymity of donors and the lack of stringent monitoring have raised concerns about the potential for money laundering. Without proper checks and balances, there is a risk that illicit funds could be channeled into political parties through electoral bonds.
3. Limited Oversight and Accountability: The oversight mechanism for electoral bonds has been criticized for being insufficient. The regulatory framework may not be robust enough to ensure proper accountability in the use of these bonds, potentially allowing for misuse.
4. Exclusion of Small Donors: The system of electoral bonds tends to favor larger donors who can afford to purchase bonds in significant denominations. This may lead to the exclusion of smaller donors from the political funding process, limiting the diversity of financial support for political parties.
5. Potential for Undue Influence: Critics argue that the lack of transparency and the anonymity of donors could lead to undue influence by powerful entities or individuals on political parties. Without knowing the source of funds, it becomes difficult to assess whether political decisions are influenced by certain donors.
6. Limited Impact on Black Money: While electoral bonds were introduced to reduce the use of black money in politics, some critics contend that the impact has been limited. They argue that without comprehensive reforms in political funding and stricter monitoring, the problem of unaccounted-for money may persist.
7. Bypassing Election Commission Scrutiny: The electoral bonds system allows political parties to receive funds without the mandatory scrutiny of the Election Commission. This has raised concerns about the effectiveness of existing regulatory bodies in ensuring the integrity of the political funding process.
8. Short Validity Period: Electoral bonds have a limited validity period within which they can be encashed by political parties. Critics argue that this short duration may not be sufficient for adequate scrutiny of the source of funds and may undermine the effectiveness of the transparency measures.

It's important to note that opinions on these issues may vary, and the effectiveness of electoral bonds in addressing concerns related to political funding is a subject of ongoing debate and discussion in India.

Political parties in India are not directly covered under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, which means that citizens cannot use RTI to seek information from political parties about their funding and internal affairs.

However, there have been discussions and debates about bringing greater transparency to political funding and including political parties under the ambit of the RTI Act.

Here are some key points regarding political funding and RTI in India:

1. Political Parties Exemption: Political parties were explicitly exempted from the RTI Act through amendments in 2013. This exemption has been a source of criticism, with arguments for and against the inclusion of political parties under the RTI Act.
2. Demand for Transparency: There has been a consistent demand from civil society organizations, activists, and some citizens to bring political parties under the RTI Act. Proponents argue that this would enhance transparency and accountability in political funding and decision-making processes.
3. Central Information Commission (CIC) Order: Despite the exemption, there have been instances where the Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled that political parties are public authorities and should be more transparent. However, these rulings have not led to a consistent practice, and political parties have often contested such decisions.
4. Legal Challenges: Political parties have challenged attempts to bring them under the RTI Act, citing concerns about privacy of internal deliberations, potential misuse, and the need to maintain a certain level of confidentiality in their operations.
5. Proposed Reforms: Over the years, there have been discussions and proposals to reform political funding in India. The introduction of electoral bonds was one such attempt, though it has faced its share of criticisms.

Electoral reforms aimed at addressing the influence of money power in Indian elections have been a topic of discussion and debate for several years. While there have been some measures taken, the issue persists, and ongoing efforts are being made to bring about meaningful changes. Here are some electoral reforms related to money power in India:

1. Electoral Bonds: Introduced in 2018, electoral bonds were intended to bring transparency to political funding by channeling donations through banking channels. However, they have faced criticism for allowing anonymous donations, potentially leading to concerns about the influence of black money.
2. Transparency in Political Funding: There have been calls for greater transparency in political funding, including the disclosure of the sources of funding for political parties. The current system allows for a lack of clarity regarding the donors, leading to concerns about the influence of vested interests.
3. Caps on Expenditure: The Election Commission of India (ECI) sets limits on the amount of money a candidate or political party can spend during elections. However, enforcing these limits effectively remains a challenge. There are discussions about revising and effectively implementing these limits to curb excessive spending.
4. Public Funding of Elections: There have been suggestions to explore the possibility of public funding for political parties to reduce their dependence on private donations. This could help in minimizing the influence of money power in elections.
5. Digital Transactions: Encouraging digital transactions for political donations is another reform idea. It aims to promote transparency and traceability in financial transactions, making it more difficult for illegal funds to influence the electoral process.
6. Stricter Enforcement and Monitoring: Strengthening the enforcement mechanisms and monitoring systems to track and penalize violations of campaign expenditure limits is crucial. This includes effective oversight by election commissions and regulatory bodies.
7. Revisiting Electoral Bond System: While electoral bonds were introduced to make political funding more transparent, there have been calls to revisit and reform the system. Critics argue that the anonymity of donors raises concerns about the potential misuse of the bonds.
8. Periodic Review of Laws: Regular reviews of election laws and electoral processes are essential to address emerging challenges. Periodic revisions and updates to electoral laws can help in adapting to the changing dynamics of political finance.
9. Greater Accountability: There have been discussions about enhancing the accountability of political parties by making them more accountable to the public. This includes greater disclosure of their financial transactions and adherence to ethical standards.

The electoral bond system in India has been a subject of debate and scrutiny. To move forward and address the concerns associated with electoral bonds, several measures and reforms can be considered. Here are some potential ways forward:

1. Increased Transparency:
• Disclosure of Donors: Consider amending the electoral bond system to require political parties to disclose the identity of donors for larger denominations. Balancing the need for privacy with the demand for transparency is crucial.
2. Periodic Review and Evaluation:
• Regular Assessment: Establish a mechanism for regular reviews and evaluations of the electoral bond system. This would involve assessing its impact on reducing black money and enhancing transparency in political funding.
3. Strengthening Oversight:
• Enhanced Regulatory Oversight: Strengthen the oversight mechanisms to ensure that the issuance and use of electoral bonds adhere to the intended principles of transparency. This may involve empowering regulatory bodies to conduct thorough audits.
4. Public Awareness and Participation:
• Public Awareness Campaigns: Conduct public awareness campaigns to educate citizens about the electoral bond system, its purpose, and its potential impact on political funding. Informed citizens are better positioned to demand accountability.
5. Review Anonymity Provisions:
• Balancing Anonymity: Reevaluate the anonymity provisions of electoral bonds to strike a balance between protecting donors' privacy and ensuring transparency. Consider setting thresholds beyond which donor identities must be disclosed.
6. Addressing Money Laundering Concerns:
• Stringent Anti-Money Laundering Measures: Strengthen measures to prevent the potential misuse of electoral bonds for money laundering. This may involve collaboration with financial intelligence units and adopting more robust Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures.
7. Promoting Digital Transactions:
• Encouraging Digital Donations: Promote and incentivize digital transactions for political donations. This not only enhances traceability but also aligns with broader efforts to move toward a digital economy.
8. Public Funding Mechanisms:
• Exploration of Public Funding: Explore the possibility of introducing or expanding public funding mechanisms for political parties. This could reduce their reliance on private donations and mitigate the influence of money power.
9. Consultative Approach:
• Stakeholder Consultations: Engage in consultations with various stakeholders, including political parties, civil society organizations, and experts, to gather diverse perspectives on the electoral bond system and potential reforms.
10. Legal Reforms:
• Legislative Changes: Consider legislative changes to address specific concerns raised about the electoral bond system. This could involve amending relevant laws to enhance accountability and transparency.
11. International Best Practices:
• Benchmarking: Evaluate international best practices in political funding and electoral finance. Identify successful models that balance transparency with the protection of donors' rights and privacy.
12. Independent Commission:
• Establishment of an Independent Commission: Consider the creation of an independent commission tasked with overseeing political funding, ensuring transparency, and recommending reforms based on evolving needs.