The Aug. 5 demonstrations by the main opposition Indian National Congress party against soaring food prices and unemployment began like any other recent protest — an electorally weak opposition taking to the New Delhi streets against Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s massively popular government.
However, the protests quickly took a turn when key Congress lawmakers led by Rahul Gandhi — Modi’s main opponent in the previous two general elections — trooped to parliament, leading to fierce standoffs with police.
“Democracy is a memory [in India],” Gandhi later tweeted, describing the dramatic photographs that showed him and his party leaders being briefly detained by police.
Illustration: Mountain People
Gandhi’s statement was largely seen as yet another frantic effort by a crisis-ridden opposition party to shore up its relevance and was dismissed by the government.
However, it resonated with the growing sentiment that India’s democracy — the world’s largest with nearly 1.4 billion people — is in retreat and its democratic foundations are floundering.
Experts and critics say trust in the judiciary as a check on executive power is eroding. Assaults on the press and free speech have grown brazen. Religious minorities are facing increasing attacks by Hindu nationalists. Largely peaceful protests, sometimes against provocative policies, have been stamped out by Internet clampdowns and the jailing of activists.
“Most former colonies have struggled to put a lasting democratic process in place. India was more successful than most in doing that,” Booker Prize-winning novelist and activist Arundhati Roy said. “And now, 75 years on, to witness it being dismantled systematically and in shockingly violent ways is traumatic.”
Modi’s ministers say India’s democratic principles are robust, even thriving: “If today there is a sense in the world that democracy is, in some form, the future, then a large part of it is due to India,” Indian Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said, adding that “there was a time when, in this part of the world, we were the only democracy.”
History is on Jaishankar’s side. At midnight on Aug. 15, 1947, the red sandstone parliamentary building in the heart of India’s capital echoed with the high-pitched voice of Jawaharlal Nehru, the country’s first prime minister.
“At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom,” Nehru famously said.
They were words that were heard over live radio by millions of Indians. Then he promised: “To the nations and peoples of the world, we send greetings and pledge ourselves to cooperate with them in furthering peace, freedom and democracy.”
It marked India’s transition from a British colony to a democracy — the first in South Asia — that has since transformed from a poverty-stricken nation into one of the world’s fastest-growing economies, earning itself a seat at the global high table and becoming a democratic counterweight to its authoritarian neighbor, China.
Apart from a brief interruption in 1975 when a formal emergency was declared under Congress party rule that saw outright censorship, India clung doggedly to its democratic convictions — largely due to free elections, an independent judiciary that confronted the executive, a thriving media, strong opposition and peaceful transitions of power.
However, experts and critics say the country has been gradually departing from some commitments and argue the backsliding has accelerated since Modi came to power in 2014. They accuse his populist government of using unbridled political power to undermine democratic freedoms and preoccupying itself with pursuing a Hindu nationalist agenda.
“The decline seems to continue across several core formal democratic institutions...such as the freedom of expression and alternative sources of information, and freedom of association,” said Staffan Lindberg, the director of Swedish research center the V-Dem Institute.
Modi’s party denies this. A spokesperson, Shehzad Poonawalla, said India has been a “thriving democracy” under Modi’s rule and has witnessed “reclamation of the republic.”
Most democracies are hardly immune to strains. The number of countries experiencing democratic backsliding “has never been as high” as in the past decade, the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance said last year, adding the US to the list along with India and Brazil.
However, the descent appears to be striking in India. Earlier this year, the US-based non-profit Freedom House downgraded India from a free democracy to “partially free.”
The V-Dem Institute classified it as an “electoral autocracy” on a par with Russia, while the Democracy Index published by the Economist Intelligence Unit called India a “flawed democracy.”
India’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has called the downgrades “inaccurate” and “distorted.”
Many Indian leaders have said such reports are an intrusion in “internal matters,” with India’s Parliament disallowing debates on them.
Globally, India strongly advocates democracy. During the inaugural Summit for Democracy organized by the US in December, Modi asserted the “democratic spirit” is integral to India’s “civilization ethos.”
However, at home his government is seen bucking that very spirit, with independent institutions coming under increasing scrutiny. Experts point to long pending cases with India’s Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of key decisions taken by Modi’s government as major concerns.
They include cases related to a controversial citizenship review process that has already left almost 2 million people in Assam state potentially stateless, the now revoked semi-autonomous powers pertaining to disputed Kashmir, the opaque campaign finance laws that are seen to disproportionately favor Modi’s party, and its alleged use of military-grade spyware to monitor political opponents and journalists.
India’s judiciary, which is independent of the executive, has faced criticism in the past but the intensity has increased, former Indian Supreme Court judge Deepak Gupta said.
Gupta said India’s democracy appears to be “on the downswing” due to the court’s inability to uphold civil liberties in some cases by denying people bail, and the misuse of sedition and anti-terror laws by police — tactics that were also used by earlier governments.
“When it comes to adjudication of disputes the courts have done a good job. But when it comes to their role as protectors of the rights of the people, I wish the courts had done more,” he said.
The country’s democratic health has also taken a hit due to the status of minorities. The largely Hindu nation has been proud of its multiculturalism and has about 200 million Muslims. It also has a history of bloody sectarian violence, but hate speech and violence against Muslims have recently increased.
Some states ruled by Modi’s party have used bulldozers to demolish the homes and shops of alleged Muslim protesters, a move critics say is a form of collective punishment. The government has sought to downplay these attacks, but the incidents have left the minority community reeling in fear.
“Sometimes you need extra protection for the minorities so that they don’t feel that they are second-rate citizens,” Gupta said.
That the rising tide of Hindu nationalism has helped buoy the fortunes of Modi’s party is evident in its electoral successes. It has also coincided with a rather glaring fact: The ruling party has no Muslim lawmaker in parliament, a first in the history of India.
The inability to fully eliminate discrimination and attacks against other minorities like Christians, tribals and Dalits — who form the lowest rung of India’s Hindu caste hierarchy — has exacerbated these concerns. Although the government sees the ascent of an indigenous woman as India’s ceremonial president as a significant step toward equal representation, critics have called it political optics.
Under Modi, India’s parliament has also come under scrutiny for passing important laws with little debate, including a religious-driven citizenship law and controversial agricultural reform that led to massive protests. In a rare retreat, his government withdrew the farm laws which some saw as a triumph of democracy, but that sentiment quickly faded with increased attacks on free speech and the press.
The country fell eight places, to 150 out of 180 countries, in this year’s Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders, which said: “Indian journalists who are too critical of the government are subjected to all-out harassment and attack campaigns.”
Shrinking press freedoms in India date back to previous governments but the last few years have been worse. Journalists have been arrested. Some are stopped from traveling abroad. Dozens are facing criminal prosecution, including sedition. At the same time, the government has introduced sweeping regulatory laws for social media companies that give it more power to police online content.
“One has only to look around to see that the media has certainly shriveled up during Mr. Modi’s regime,” said journalist Coomi Kapoor, author of a book that chronicles India’s period of emergency. “What happened in the emergency was upfront and there was no pretense. What is happening now is more gradual and sinister,” she added.
Optimists such as Kapoor say not everything would be lost “if India strengthens its democratic institutions” and “pins its hopes on the judiciary.”
However, “if the independence of the judiciary goes, then I’m afraid nothing will survive,” she said.
Meanwhile, others insist India’s democracy has taken so many body blows that the future looks increasingly bleak. “The damage is too structural, too fundamental,” said Roy, the novelist and activist.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS