Media365
India’s democracy was not a gift to its people by a benevolent ruler. It was won through a long and arduous struggle against colonial rule, a struggle in which millions participated and countless freedom fighters sacrificed their lives.
When India became independent, the Constituent Assembly, under the leadership of B R Ambedkar, gave this democratic aspiration an extraordinary institutional form. The Constitution established India as a sovereign democratic republic and guaranteed universal adult suffrage. Many democracies, including the US and European countries, took generations to overcome restrictions based on property, race, gender and social status. India began its constitutional life with universal adult franchise.
The Narendra Modi government is systematically weakening the institutions that sustain democratic accountability. Its understanding of democracy appears to begin and end with winning elections, while treating independent institutions, opposition parties, dissenting citizens and public scrutiny as obstacles to be overcome. The Election Commission of India (ECI) has come under unprecedented scrutiny. Article 324 vests in the ECI the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections to Parliament, state legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice President. This mandate demands independence, impartiality and public confidence.
Elections have increasingly been distorted by the enormous advantages enjoyed by the BJP through money power, the use of state machinery and the weakening of institutional checks. The electoral bonds scheme, struck down by the Supreme Court in 2024, exposed how an opaque system of political funding had enabled the ruling party to benefit disproportionately from anonymous donations. The 2023 law governing the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners marked another grave setback. It replaced the Supreme Court-prescribed selection arrangement with a committee dominated by the executive, giving the government of the day decisive influence over the selection of its leadership.
The independence of the Election Commission cannot survive on assurances alone when the executive it is supposed to scrutinise exercises such control over the selection of its leadership. Questions about the institution’s credibility have also been raised by former Election Commissioners. The BJP’s response has not been to restore confidence through transparency and accountability, but to demand unquestioning acceptance of the institution’s decisions.
The Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls has brought these concerns to a dangerous new level. More than 13 crore names have been deleted during the SIR exercise. The fundamental question is simple: In a democracy, voters are supposed to elect their rulers, not the other way around. When millions of names disappear from electoral rolls, the burden of proof cannot be shifted onto citizens who are already disadvantaged. Nor can the ECI expect the public to accept its assurances without transparent procedures, verifiable records and independent scrutiny. The controversy over unilateral changes to Form 6 has only deepened the crisis of confidence.
The scale of the Modi government’s anxiety about this movement is evident in the response to peaceful protest. Delhi was fortified with barricades and an overwhelming deployment of security personnel. Students and youth who gathered to demand Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation were detained, manhandled and beaten by Delhi Police, a force under Union Home Minister Amit Shah. Journalists covering the demonstrations were also detained, drawing condemnation from press-freedom organisations. The INDIA bloc, with the active participation of the Left, has joined a growing people’s movement to restore public confidence in the democratic process. This movement must go beyond demanding the resignation of Gyanesh Kumar. It must press for independent and transparent appointments to the Election Commission, a review of electoral-roll deletions, accountability for arbitrary exclusions, transparency in political funding and meaningful electoral reform. It must also advance the demand for a return to paper ballots, reflecting the widespread distrust of electronic voting systems among sections of the electorate.
Gyanesh Kumar must resign, electoral reforms must follow, and the people’s right to determine their own destiny must prevail. The movement will continue.
The writer is general secretary, CPI
