The lessons in democracy must be learned before the examination begins, says OSWALD PEREIRA
A democracy is tested not merely by the elections it conducts, but by the freedoms it protects, the institutions it preserves and the criticism it is willing to tolerate.
A political party and its leader are important in a democracy. But the issues a democracy faces are larger than individual ambitions and more significant than partisan politics. The real test is whether the institutions of the state remain strong enough to protect citizens, restrain power and uphold the Constitution.
What, then, is democracy?
Democracy is about freedom.
But what does freedom really mean? What happens when institutions created to protect citizens begin to weaken? Can a country continue to call itself democratic when dissent becomes inconvenient to those in power, institutions become deferential to authority, the press stops asking difficult questions and citizens begin to confuse loyalty to a political party with loyalty to the nation?
These are not merely political questions. They are questions about the health of a republic.
India remains a constitutional democracy. Elections are held, governments are chosen by voting, Parliament and the courts function, newspapers are published and political parties campaign. But democracy is more than the presence of democratic institutions. It is also about the independence of those institutions.
It is the freedom to disagree, the right to question authority and the ability of institutions to say no to governments when the Constitution requires them to do so.
A democratic government must be willing to accept criticism without treating critics as enemies. Most importantly, there must be a shared understanding that no individual, however powerful, is greater than the Constitution.
What happens to democracy when power becomes more important than accountability?
Democracies do not necessarily die with a dramatic announcement. There may be no declaration of dictatorship, no abolition of elections and no sudden disappearance of Parliament. Democratic decline can be much quieter.
An institution compromises a little. A journalist remains silent once. A court delivers a judgement that raises questions about institutional independence. A government treats dissent as disloyalty. A citizen looks away.
Then another institution becomes dependent on the executive, another question goes unasked and another uncomfortable voice is marginalised. Individually, such events may appear insignificant. Together, they can alter the character of a republic.
This is why democracy requires vigilance long before a crisis becomes obvious.
Indian democracy has not ceased to exist. It would be wrong to claim that every institution has failed or that every allegation against the government, the judiciary, the Election Commission or the media is necessarily true. Such sweeping claims would themselves violate the spirit of democratic inquiry.
But that does not mean that questions should not be asked.
It is necessary to examine whether democratic institutions remain sufficiently independent, citizens remain free to dissent, the media continues to perform its watchdog role and constitutional safeguards are strong enough to prevent the concentration of power from becoming permanent.
The distinction between fact, allegation, perception and proof is particularly important. Democratic debate becomes weaker when criticism is based on assumption rather than evidence. At the same time, democracy becomes vulnerable when every concern about institutional independence is dismissed simply because it is uncomfortable.
A mature democracy must be able to hold both ideas together: criticism must be responsible, and power must remain accountable.
It is therefore premature to pronounce a final verdict on the health of Indian democracy. But it is entirely legitimate to ask difficult questions and examine them honestly. A democracy worthy of the name should be strong enough to withstand questions about itself.
Political power is temporary. Constitutional principles are intended to endure.
Governments may command the machinery of the state for a period of time, but they do not own the state, the Constitution or the Republic. The government of the day is a trustee of public power, not its permanent proprietor.
These are simple but important Lessons in Democracy.
Every generation must learn them again and again.
Democracy is not a finished achievement handed down permanently from one generation to the next. It is a living system that depends upon institutions, conventions, civic courage and public vigilance. One generation can strengthen it; another can weaken it.
A constitution can establish democratic institutions. Only a democratic culture can keep them alive.
This is especially important in an age of increasingly concentrated political power, instant communication, manufactured outrage and declining trust in institutions. The machinery of democracy may continue to operate even while its deeper spirit begins to weaken.
The important questions, therefore, are these: Can India preserve the extraordinary democratic experiment created by its Constitution? Can its institutions remain sufficiently independent to restrain power? Can citizens continue to disagree without fear? And, most importantly, can democratic decline be recognised early enough to be reversed?
The answers matter far beyond any particular government or political era.
India belongs not to the government of the day, nor to any political party, leader or ideology. It belongs to its citizens.
The Constitution begins with the words, “We, the People of India.” Those words are not merely an introduction to a legal document. They are a reminder of where sovereign authority ultimately resides.
The citizen, therefore, is not merely a voter who appears at a polling booth once every few years. The citizen is a participant in the Republic, with both rights and responsibilities. Democracy requires citizens who are willing to question authority, defend institutions and protect the freedoms of others, even when they disagree with them.
The examination of democracy does not begin on election day.
It begins much earlier—in the classroom, in the newsroom, in Parliament, in the courtroom, in public debate and in the ordinary citizen’s willingness to ask whether power is being exercised within constitutional limits.
The question, therefore, is not simply whether India is democratic today.
The more important question is whether Indians will remain sufficiently vigilant to ensure that it remains democratic tomorrow.
That is why the lessons in democracy must be learned before the examination begins.
Oswald Pereira, a senior journalist, has written ten books, including The Vijay Revolution: People Power & the Politics of Hope, Beyond Autobiography of a Yogi, The Newsroom Mafia, Chaddi Buddies, The Krishna-Christ Connexion, How to Create Miracles in Our Daily Life and Crime Patrol: The Most Thrilling Stories. Oswald is a disciple of Paramhansa Yogananda and practises Kriya Yoga.
More Stories by Oswald Pereira
Some images are AI generated