ED’s Conviction Rate Under Scrutiny: Only Two Politicians Convicted in a Decade

In a revelation that raises serious questions about the credibility and efficiency of India’s premier financial probe agency, the Modi government informed the Rajya Sabha that only two politicians have been convicted under the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) investigations in the last ten years, out of 193 cases registered against political figures.

The information was provided in a written reply by junior finance minister Pankaj Chaudhary in response to an unstarred question raised by Communist Party of India (Marxist) MP A.A. Rahim. The disclosure has intensified debates within the political corridors, with the Opposition alleging that the ED has become a tool for political witch-hunting rather than genuine law enforcement.

The data submitted by the ministry presents a stark contrast between the number of cases registered and the actual convictions. Of the 193 cases filed, 59 were registered between 2022 and 2024 alone—a period leading up to the crucial 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The highest number of cases, 32, were lodged in the 2022-23 fiscal year, followed by 27 in both 2020-21 and 2023-24, and 26 in 2019-20 and 2021-22.

However, despite this surge in cases, only two convictions have been secured—one in 2016-17 and another in 2019-20—pointing to an abysmally low success rate in court. This dismal track record has reignited concerns over the ED’s efficiency, with critics arguing that the agency's primary role has been intimidation rather than legal enforcement.

BJP’s ‘Washing Machine’ Allegations Gain Momentum.

A media report earlier highlighted that at least 25 Opposition leaders facing ED scrutiny had cases against them dropped after joining the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Prominent names include West Bengal’s Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari, Maharashtra deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar, former Maharashtra chief minister Ashok Chavan, and Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.

In stark contrast, leaders who remained in the Opposition camp have found themselves behind bars. Former Delhi chief minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) supremo Arvind Kejriwal was recently arrested in connection with the alleged liquor scam.

Similarly, Trinamool Congress heavyweights such as former Bengal education minister Partha Chatterjee, Jyoti priya Mullick, and Anubrata Mondal have faced arrest, though many have managed to secure bail. Trinamool Congress general secretary Abhishek Banerjee was also repeatedly interrogated in connection with the alleged coal scam.

The Opposition has long accused central agencies like the ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) of acting as the ruling party’s enforcers, rather than independent investigative bodies. The Congress, Trinamool Congress, and other parties have frequently dubbed these agencies as the BJP’s “washing machines,” where political adversaries are coerced into either switching sides or facing prolonged legal battles.

A.A. Rahim’s question in the Rajya Sabha had specifically sought clarity on the state-wise and party-wise breakup of ED cases against political figures. However, the junior finance minister categorically stated that such data was “not maintained.” This vague response has only fueled suspicions that the government is deliberately evading accountability on whether Opposition leaders are being disproportionately targeted.

Judiciary Raises Concerns Over ED’s Conviction Rate

The Supreme Court has also raised eyebrows over the ED’s low conviction rate. During a hearing on Partha Chatterjee’s bail plea last November, the apex court remarked on the agency’s inefficiency in securing convictions and questioned how long individuals could be held under trial. The Court emphasized the need for a uniform policy on arrests and stressed that ED’s actions must be balanced by judicial oversight.

Legal experts argue that despite its sweeping powers under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the ED has failed to translate investigations into tangible legal victories. “The agency’s credibility is at stake. A high number of cases but negligible convictions suggest political vendetta rather than genuine law enforcement,” said Supreme Court advocate Prashant Bhushan.

Defending the agency, minister Pankaj Chaudhary stated, “The Directorate of Enforcement is a premier law enforcement agency of the Government of India, entrusted with the administration and enforcement of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, and Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. The ED takes up cases based on credible evidence and does not distinguish based on political affiliations, religion, or otherwise.”

However, this assertion has done little to quell the growing skepticism. With a conviction rate of just over 1%, critics argue that the ED’s selective actions against political adversaries raise fundamental concerns about its independence and credibility. The agency’s accountability, while theoretically subject to judicial review, appears to be overshadowed by political compulsions.

With the general elections approaching and political stakes higher than ever, the ED’s role is likely to come under even more scrutiny. The Opposition has already hinted at making the alleged misuse of central agencies a key election issue, demanding a review of the agency’s autonomy and functioning.

As allegations of political bias and vendetta mount, the ED’s credibility as an independent probe agency stands on shaky ground. The onus is now on the government to ensure that investigative agencies serve justice, not political agendas. Until then, the question remains—has the ED become more of a political weapon than a law enforcement agency?