In the run-up to India’s general election, a series of revelations have stirred controversy concerning political donations, particularly focusing on the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Reports emerged disclosing that major political contributors, including companies under federal investigation and the so-called ‘Lottery King’ Santiago Martin, have significantly funded the BJP through a mechanism known as electoral bonds.

These bonds, introduced by the Indian government in 2017, permitted anonymous donations from individuals and corporations to political parties, provoking concerns about transparency and potential corruption. The Supreme Court of India recently struck down the electoral bonds scheme, declaring it unconstitutional for enabling anonymity and possibly fostering “quid pro quo” arrangements.

The BJP has been highlighted as a primary beneficiary of this scheme, receiving around £570 million and accounting for over 54% of all bonds issued, significantly outpacing its rivals like the Indian National Congress. Among the top donors were companies engaged in sectors under heavy regulation, such as construction and mining, and individuals like Santiago Martin, who faces allegations of fraud and money laundering. Martin’s company, Future Gaming and Hotel Services, reportedly purchased Rs13.68bn worth of electoral bonds between 2019 and 2024.

The revelations have provoked criticism from opposition parties, with figures like Jairam Ramesh of the Congress party accusing the scheme of facilitating high-level corruption. Despite demands from these parties for full transparency regarding political donors, the BJP, through Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, has dismissed these allegations as assumptions.

As India approaches its national elections, the disclosure of these donations and the prior anonymity afforded by electoral bonds add a contentious dimension to the political debate, raising broader questions about the integrity of political funding in the country.