Swedish institute VDem recently published a data-heavy report, noting India’s shift from being an “electoral democracy” to an “electoral autocracy” and categorising it among the bottom 50% of the world’s countries on its liberal democracy index. But is this an honest reflection of India’s socio-political condition or a biased representation, part of a larger narrative against India being created by the Western media? In a recent interview, author, scholar and former chairman of Prasar Bharati A. Surya Prakash presented a critique of recent democracy reports and the picture they paint of India.
A. Surya Prakash.
“In the VDem report, Denmark is place at number one. Its constitution says that the Evangelical-Lutheran Church shall be supported by the state. Our constitution prohibits any link between religion and state. In fact, Article 28 in the Constitution bars religious education in any educational institution wholly funded by the state. One of the foundations of democracy is such a separation of religion and the state. So, it can be said that secularism is absent in Denmark,” Surya Prakash noted. “The RSF (Reporters Without Borders) and VDem reports also place Maldives way above India. Article 9 of the Constitution of the Maldives says only Muslims can be citizens. The state is wedded to the tenets of Islam in the Maldives. If that is so, is it a democracy? And one ahead of India?” he questioned.
As another example, he pointed out that in the constitution of Sweden, the third-best democracy according to VDem, Article 5 says that the king or queen shall be the head of state, thus making it a monarchy, not a republic like India. He also highlighted how the Swedish constitution dictates members of the monarchy the religion they must follow and mandates government permission before marrying. “Here, we can choose the religion we wish to adhere to or not to have any and be atheists. And imagine the Indian Constitution telling one individual or community that you need government permission to marry,” said Prakash.
“The US State Department says slavery is endemic in Burkina Faso! And it is suppose to be the 36th among democracies, while we are 142nd,” he said, critiquing the RSF report further.
The former Prasar Bharati chairman also highlighted how the Directive Principles instruct that the means of production be evenly distributed for equal development. Unlike monarchies, which create different classes of people, India has equality before the law, he added. “We are also civilisationally secular.”
Surya Prakash then elaborated on eight elements—an inviolable commitment to freedom of expression and conscience, an unambiguous constitutional commitment to secularism, separation of religion and state, a republican form of government, a constitutional right to equality before law, gender equality, right to life and personal liberty, and universal adult suffrage—which are “the foundations on which democracy is built” and established that the Indian Constitution has all these elements.
Freedom House, which moved India from “free” to “partly free” in its 2021 report, had cited deterioration in “political rights and civil liberties… since Narendra Modi became Prime Minster in 2014.” Regarding allegations about curbs placed on the freedom of expression and the press, Dr Prakash countered, “Just go on Twitter every day and see the hashtags attacking Prime Minister Modi. There are millions of supporters of PM Modi and the ruling BJP and millions of others opposed to them. We are a liberal, open democracy. Don’t such institutes see this?” He added, “In 2014, the daily print order of newspapers was 150 million. In 2018, it went to 240 million. There are 200 news channels. Have those people never seen our primetime debates? The match that is on between the Opposition and the ruling parties every day. And they say we are not a deliberative democracy.”
He also slammed VDem’s report for indicating a lack of political freedom in India and raising doubts on the electoral process. “This is absolutely ridiculous. They are not aware of our constitutional reality and federal structure. Other than the BJP, there are 44 political parties governing us in the states. If the ruling party at the Centre is dictating terms, how did YSR, TRS and TMC get a majority of Lok Sabha seats in their states? The federal government itself is run by a coalition. Why are they unable to see this plurality? Saying we have no political freedom is the biggest joke…You may say anything you want about us but do not question the integrity of our elections. No citizen should accept this.”
Warning Indians to not fall for the “traps” laid by these democracy reports, Surya Prakash also criticised the questions raised against the integrity of the Indian judiciary. With references to Article 368 of the Constitution, and landmark judgements like the Kesavananda Bharati and Minerva Mills cases which evolved the doctrine of basic structure and the Indira Nehru Gandhi vs Raj Narain case which upheld the judiciary’s check on the power of the government, Prakash underlined, “We are a great nation with great institutions. Let us be proud of this.”
Responding to a question about why such reports tend to be lopsided and misleading, he opined, “Those who are producing these reports have never actually travelled in India. They are making their own assessments. Over the years, there has been a certain contempt for India. They always thought we are a primitive society—even Churchill did—incapable of running a good democratic system. But we are proving them wrong, also on the social and economic fronts. We have kept the nation together when everything around us is collapsing and nations formed on the basis of religion are breaking away.”
So, as a nation, should India contest these reports and the perception they create or ignore them? “In the first 60 years or so, there was a certain Nehruvian model of governance, especially with regard to our response to the international community. And it meant putting up with a lot of things we should not have, like such reports condemning India,” said Surya Prakash, emphasising that India must not ignore them anymore, but reject and question them.
“We are the largest democracy in the world, the most diverse society. It is for the rest of the world to see how we manage this, how we have brought about a certain synthesis and harmony. My view is that as the largest democracy, we should have institutions to rate other democracies—and first to define democracy itself,” he said.
In his concluding remarks, Dr Prakash sent a direct message to the “custodians of democracy” coming up with such reports. “Please don’t lecture us. Look at your own constitutions and reflect over what I have said. If you run India down, you are running democracy down. We are the most vibrant democracy and plural society in the world. Don’t think you can knock us off our pedestal. Those who ran our government in the past have allowed you to get away with this, but we have to challenge this now.”