Systematic collapse of democracy

Josef Stalin has been quoted as saying, "It's not the people who vote that count, it's the people who count the votes." In Stalin's Russia, this was the common norm and also the reason behind his massive success as a politician.

Fair elections in those days were a luxury enjoyed only by Western democracy, as much of the world had just come out of colonization and some were still part of it. The idea of fundamental rights and rule-based order with institutional autonomy as well as smooth transition of power was a complex concept for these new societies, which had a history of bloody power transfers.

Western critics had similar apprehensions about India as it was taking baby steps toward democracy in the mid-1950s. A country with diverse languages, religions, castes and creeds, it was viewed with skepticism as to whether it would be able to survive as a democracy. Citing the recent Partition of erstwhile British India, Western liberal pundits predicted more partition of Indian states. These doubts prevailed until India held its first parliamentary election in 1952.

Over the next four decades, India not only proved those critics wrong but also made a mark at the international level by becoming the world's largest democracy, with institutional credibility, freedom of the press, and protection of civil rights.

Certainly, there were also some dark moments, such as when Indira Gandhi didn't honor the commitments under the constitution and declared the Emergency in the mid1970s, citing the reason as external threats to the country.

India has come a long way since then. At the dawn of the 21st century, India's vibrant democracy with a multiparty system, a large young population, and a growing economy put the country into the global spotlight.

But what's important about this democracy is a young demographic, which is its strength but also a cause of weakness. Despite constituting a large part of the electorate, the younger generation lacks experi

internal and ence of those black days of democracy. Much of this segment is not aware that in a democracy, the people's responsibility doesn't end with voting but starts from there.

As well, the optimistic vision of liberals that the Internet and digital access would empower democracy and usher in a new era of freedom has not been realized. Instead, we find ourselves in a dramatically different set of circumstances; the digital era is not shaped by openness, but rather by manipulation.

So the idea of suspension of democracy through draconian laws and emergency measures has become naive in the 21st century. In our new democratic systems, such a situation can be created through a softer and invisible replay of previous experiences through a systematic collapse of the pillars of democracy, rather than military action or a coup as in the past.

Subverting the pillars of democracy mainly takes three forms: influencing the umpire's decision (constitutional body), sidelining of players, and weakening or rewriting the rules of the game.

Russia under President Vladimir Putin,

Peru under Alberto Fujimori, and Hungary under Viktor Orban are some of the best examples of this in recent times. One new entrant to this list is India under Narendra Modi. The autonomy of essential institutions has witnessed a steady decline due to the cult personality culture of India's prime minister. There are several incidents where Indian institutional credibility has been questioned openly.

The death of India's credible institutions One of the key pillars of any democracy is the judiciary. It's the one that provides a reality check to power. But lately, the behavior of this institution is protecting government interests rather than the public interest, which should be its prime objective.

In the last six years, the court has ceased to confront the government on many controversial decisions such as the electoral bonds case, the Citizenship Amendment Act, demonetization, the migrant crisis, and so on. None of its decisions have come as a reality check to power.

In a few days, the attorney general will proceed with a contempt-of-court case against a comedian who questions the chief justice of India. In 2018, for the first time in history, four judges of the Supreme Court had to organize a press conference to share their grievances against the chief justice. Cases having farreaching consequences for the nation and judiciary were selectively assigned to benches of preference without any rational basis.

This clearly shows the house is not in order. We are also aware of the strength Indian media have shown toward the government in the last few years. India's rank of 142 out of 180 on the world Press Freedom Index is a small testimony. The consistent drop on a year-on-year basis in press freedom depicts the harsh reality of the arrest of a journalist who dares to question the status quo.

But a more recent blow came to the credibility of the Election Commission in the Bihar Assembly election held in late October and early November, where there were reports of massive rigging and allegations of poll fraud.

The Election Commission is an autonomous constitutional authority responsible for administering the election process in India at national and state elections. In Bihar, there were serious charges made against the EC by the opposition.