Redefining democracy

Since 2014, India has witnessed a steady erosion of constitutional principles and parliamentary conventions that once defined its democratic ethos. What was envisioned by the founding fathers as a liberal, secular, and inclusive framework of governance is being systematically hollowed out, raising deep concerns among liberals, secularists, and indeed all who value constitutional democracy. The Indian Constitution, a product of extraordinary foresight, was designed to govern a people of immense diversity-religious, cultural, and linguistic. It was not merely a legal document but a moral compact, ensuring that no majority could trample upon the rights of the minority. Today, however, this vision appears to be fading. A parallel version of the Constitution seems to be evolving-one that bends towards majoritarianism, and in practice, veers dangerously close to authoritarianism. The method is subtle yet deliberate where past leaders are consistently vilified, not just to discredit them personally, but to delegitimize the institutions they built-be it parliamentary norms, the spirit of federalism, or the secular fabric of the nation. Secularism, once the bedrock of Indian democracy, is being steadily replaced with what may be called “religionism”-not the genuine practice of faith, but the cynical use of religion as an instrument of political control. Even structural reforms touted as progressive, such as the push for “One Nation, One Election,” betray a more troubling motive: the centralization of power. A synchronized electoral cycle may appear efficient, but it risks further diminishing federalism and consolidating unchecked authority in the hands of a few. Parliamentary majorities are being interpreted not as a mandate to govern responsibly within constitutional boundaries, but as a blank cheque to reshape the Constitution itself. Equally alarming is the subjugation of constitutional institutions. Presiding officers of Parliament, the Election Commission, and even the Reserve Bank of India-once independent custodians of democracy who stood up to the government of the day-now appear beholden to the ruling establishment. Investigative agencies like the Enforcement Directorate, CBI, Income Tax, Police and NIA have increasingly become instruments of political vendetta, unleashed upon opposition leaders, critics, and even journalists. An example of this can be seen in how The Wire’s founding editor, Siddharth Varadarajan, and consulting editor, Karan Thapar were summoned by Assam Police after an FIR was filed against them though the exact nature of the accusations remains unspecified. Needless to say, the Supreme Court intervened and ordered that no coercive action shall be taken by the Assam Police’s Crime Branch. Accusations of the Assam Police being used to target political opponents of BJP and critics of Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma have been widely reported by news outlets, human rights organizations, and opposition parties. This pattern is further reinforced by defections of leaders who, after conveniently switching sides emerge as the loudest attackers against their former colleagues, a development that corrodes political ethics even further. Yet, this democratic decline cannot be blamed solely on the ruling dispensation. The weakness of the opposition, particularly the Congress, has only compounded the crisis. Bereft of a credible and decisive leader, the opposition has failed to present itself as a true counterweight. To be clear, Indian opposition parties themselves are not blameless exemplars of democracy; their own records are mixed at best. However, in the face of mounting threats to constitutional democracy, the nation deserves better-an opposition strong enough to safeguard the principles enshrined in the Constitution.