Skip to main content

Democratic rule? In India, ruling party is trying to cease the existence of opposition

By Harasankar Adhikari 

The term "democracy" is derived from two Greek words: "demos ‘(or people) and ‘kratos’ (rule). So, in simple terms, democracy is the rule of the people, by the people, and for the people. ‘It is a system of governance where power and civic responsibility are, ideally, exercised directly by all citizens.' But unfortunately, the practice tells a different story because the "people" typically exercise their power indirectly through elected representatives. There, modern democracy "is a system of governance in which rulers are held accountable for their actions in the public realm by citizens, acting indirectly through the competition and cooperation of the elected representatives." The key characteristic of democracy is ‘the responsiveness of government to the preferences of its citizens," (who are, in theory, "political equals" of the rulers). In this responsiveness, ‘citizens have opportunities to formulate their preferences, articulate them, and have them considered in the conduct of the business of government.’ According to the democratic theory, ‘political parties are voluntary organizations that are supposed to promote democracy. Whereas the judiciary, the legislature, and the judiciary promote horizontal accountability, vertical accountability is promoted by the political parties, which link the people and the government. Parties organize campaigns, recruit candidates, and mobilize the political community to participate in the selection of office bearers. The goal of party activism is to 'create institutions and shape public policies, laws, and policies that affect the rights and welfare of the political community.'
In multi-party politics like India, ‘the party that is elected to form government seeks to enact into law a number of policies and programs (oftentimes consistent with their election manifesto). Opposition parties are free to criticize the ruling party’s policies, ideas, and programs and offer alternatives.’
The opposition is a central pillar to any democracy. ‘It means that, regardless of their differences, all sides in the political debate share the fundamental democratic values of free speech, the rule of law, and equal protection under the law; parties that lose elections become the opposition. The opposition, then, is essentially a "government-in-waiting." For a culture of democracy to take hold, opposition parties need to have confidence that the political system will guarantee their right to organize, speak, dissent, and/or criticize the party in power. Opposition parties also need to be assured that, in due course, they will have a chance to campaign and re-seek the people's mandate in and through regular, free, and fair elections.’
Therefore, opposition parties obviously perform the following important functions:
  • Political parties in democracies are ‘important organs for aggregating the interests of the political community. Interest aggregation often culminates in the articulation or projection of certain preferences, values, and ideologies into the policy and lawmaking processes (e.g., in Parliament) and in the budgeting process.’
  • It promotes "national conversation" and creates an environment of democratic discussion at a higher level of political development and maturity.
  • Maintaining a liaison with the voter-citizen and demonstrating the relevance of politics to ordinary people, that is, the oppressed, the marginalized, and the disenfranchised.
  • "Opposition parties hold the government to account for its commissions or omissions."
  • Opposition parties present ‘a viable alternative to the incumbent government by designing alternative ideas, principles, and policies for governing society. Should the party in power let the voters down, the "government-in-waiting" takes over the reigns of power through free and fair elections.’
  • ‘Parties strengthen the culture of democracy within the party and the political community in general (by, for example, promoting open debate during delegates’ conferences, promoting intra-party democratic elections, and ensuring accountable use of party finances).’
  • Parties work with the Electoral Commission, the mass media, and civil society organizations to monitor and improve the quality of voter registration, civic education, and electoral transparency.
  • Parties serve as breeding grounds for future leaders. Shadow cabinet ministers, for example, typically conduct serious party business in their designated portfolios.
  • Finally, opposition parties are the unpaid but dedicated principal researchers for the government in power.
But in India, the ruling party is trying to cease the existence of the opposition, and its target is to make opposition zero. That means the ruling government does not prefer the important pillar of democracy (opposition). It is a cultural orientation of political anarchism toward political monarchism. It has been observed that the opposition does not get priority in playing the role of the opponent. Opposition is almost always ignored. Specially, the government does not listen to the criticism of the opposition relating to different policies, programs, or even the budget. Further, polls at different hierarchies remind us of this culture.
We find that in India, free and fair elections are a daydream. But fear during the election is the most common feature. The scientific rigging, booth jams, violence and threats, and hooliganism are fear centric events of the election. The dominant majority varied according to the particular dominant groups of the particular geographical territory, which controls all these election events deliberately.
From the lower house to the upper house, the opponents are ignored because the majority thinks, they are doing dirty politics. There is, in fact, a culture of favoritism. No one likes to leave the field. The common mass of elected opponents is deprived of development activities. For instance, at Panchayat level, the majority (ruling the Panchayat) does not allot funds for the development of the villages of the elected opponents.
So, how would democracy work if there was no opposition? Who would monitor the functions of the government, and who would rectify these functions? What would be the fate of common electorates in this type of democracy? Therefore, the democracy would be renamed "Zero Democracy'. Indian democracy would turn into a political monarchy.

Comments

TRENDING

The golden crop: How turmeric is transforming women's lives in tribal India

By Vikas Meshram*   When the lush green fields of turmeric sway in the tribal belt of southern Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat, it is not merely a spice crop — it is the golden glow of self-reliance. In villages where even basic spices once had to be bought from the market, the very soil today is yielding a prosperity that has transformed the lives of thousands of families. At the heart of this transformation is the initiative of Vaagdhara, which has linked turmeric with livelihoods, nutrition, and village self-governance — gram swaraj.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Rajiv Shah  Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Authoritarian destruction of the public sphere in Ecuador: Trumpism in action?

By Pilar Troya Fernández  The situation in Ecuador under Daniel Noboa's government is one of authoritarianism advancing on several fronts simultaneously to consolidate neoliberalism and total submission to the US international agenda. These are not isolated measures, but rather a coordinated strategy that combines job insecurity, the dismantling of the welfare state, unrestricted access to mining, the continuation of oil exploitation without environmental considerations, the centralization of power through the financial suffocation of local governments, and the systematic criminalization of all forms of opposition and popular organization.

Echoes of Vietnam and Chile: The devastating cost of the I-A Axis in Iran

​ By Ram Puniyani  ​The recent joint military actions by Israel and the United States against Iran have been devastating. Like all wars, this conflict is brutal to its core, leaving a trail of human suffering in its wake. The stated pretext for this aggression—the brutality of the Ayatollah Khamenei regime and its nuclear ambitions—clashes sharply with the reality of the diplomatic landscape. Iran had expressed a willingness to remain at the negotiating table, signaling a readiness to concede points emerging from dialogue. 

False claim? What Venezuela is witnessing is not surrender but a tactical retreat

By Manolo De Los Santos  The early morning hours of January 3, 2026, marked an inflection point in Venezuela and Latin America’s centuries-long struggle for self-determination and independence. Operation Absolute Resolve, ordered by the Trump administration, constituted the most brutal and direct military assault on a sovereign state in the region in recent memory. In a shocking operation that left hundreds dead, President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores were illegally kidnapped from Venezuelan soil and transported to the United States, where they now face fabricated charges in a New York federal detention facility. In the two months since this act of war, a torrent of speculation has emerged from so-called experts and pundits across the political spectrum. This has followed three main lines: One . The operation’s success indicated treason at the highest levels of the Bolivarian Revolution. Two . Acting President Delcy Rodríguez and the remaining leadership have abandone...

The selective memory of a violent city: Uttam Nagar and the invisible victims of Delhi

By Sunil Kumar*  Hundreds of murders take place in Delhi every year, yet only a few incidents become topics of nationwide discussion. The question is: why does this happen? Today, the incident in Uttam Nagar has become the centre of national debate. A 26-year-old man, Tarun Kumar, was killed following a dispute that reportedly began after a balloon hit a small child. In several colonies of Delhi, slogans such as “Jai Shri Ram” and “Vande Mataram” are being raised while demanding the death penalty for Tarun’s killers. As a result, nearly 50,000 residents of Hastsal JJ Colony are now living in what resembles a state of confinement. 

The price of silence: Why Modi won’t follow Shastri, appeal for sacrifice

By Arundhati Dhuru, Sandeep Pandey*  ​In 1965, as India grappled with war and a crippling food crisis, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri faced a United States that used wheat shipments under the PL-480 agreement as a lever to dictate Indian foreign policy. Shastri’s response remains legendary: he appealed to the nation to skip one meal a day. Millions of middle-class households complied, choosing temporary hunger over the sacrifice of national dignity. Today, India faces a modern equivalent in the energy sector, yet the leadership’s response stands in stark contrast to that era of self-reliance.

Love letters in a lifelong war: Babusha Kohli’s resistance in verse

By Ravi Ranjan*  “War does not determine who is right—only who is left.” Bertrand Russell’s words echo hauntingly in our times, and few contemporary Hindi poets embody this truth as profoundly as Babusha Kohli. Emerging from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, Kohli has carved a unique space in literature by weaving together tenderness, protest, and philosophy across poetry, prose, and cinema. Her work is not merely artistic expression—it is resistance, refuge, and a call for peace.