In recent months, one sentiment has echoed sharply across India’s political landscape: that the Election Commission — the very institution entrusted with safeguarding our democratic process — has lost its neutrality. Allegations of bias, manipulation and opacity have become disturbingly common. Yet, amidst this rising chorus of discontent, one paradox remains unresolved: if the Election Commission is truly compromised, why does the opposition continue to participate in elections under its supervision?
This contradiction forms the heart of our present democratic crisis.
On one hand, the opposition denounces the Commission as partial; on the other, it willingly walks into electoral contests conducted by the same body. This duality raises an uncomfortable question — is the opposition genuinely committed to defending democratic integrity, or merely safeguarding its own political relevance?
When the Referee Becomes a Player
A thief continues stealing only as long as he believes his actions remain undetected. But a thief who suddenly hides is often preparing for retaliation, not escape. India’s electoral environment today reflects this brazenness.
Gyanesh Gupta, who has come under scrutiny for allegedly compromising the Commission’s credibility, offered a curious justification for voter IDs showing ‘zero’ as the address: these voters, he claims, are homeless citizens being included out of democratic compassion.
The argument may sound sensitive, but it does not address the crucial question:
Who are these voters? How are they verified? Why do they never appear in polling lines? And how do polling percentages declared on election day mysteriously change the next morning?
These discrepancies demand explanation. Yet instead of seeking answers, the opposition appears to have walked into the electoral arena unquestioningly — just as it did in Bihar.
The Two Pillars of Democracy
A functioning democracy rests on two essential pillars:
(1) Free and fair elections.
(2) A vigilant, responsible opposition.
When the machinery responsible for conducting elections shows signs of partiality, the burden naturally shifts to the opposition — not merely to contest elections, but to defend the integrity of the democratic process itself. If the opposition truly believed that Gyanesh Kumar was acting as a barrier to regime change, a “satellite” deployed to intercept any attempt at power transition, then its decision to contest elections becomes even more questionable.
Participation under such conditions only provides legitimacy to a flawed process.
Political Participation or Political Preservation?
A candid assessment suggests that in Maharashtra, Haryana and now Bihar, the opposition did not contest elections with the intention of bringing about a governmental shift. Rather, it continued contesting to preserve its organisational existence — its political businesses, its networks, its internal economies.
Rahul Gandhi made dramatic statements, comparing the present government to a “stolen mandate” and alleging that the Election Commission was compromised. These were powerful allegations. Yet they were not backed by concrete strategy.
Before entering the Bihar elections, did the opposition create any mechanism to counter the alleged bias?
Did it devise a plan to highlight irregularities systematically?
Did it attempt to rally public opinion around electoral reform? Yes they did half heartedly.
The answer appears to be no.
Which only reinforces the argument that the opposition, knowingly or unknowingly, helped legitimise a process it had already declared corrupt.
The Opposition’s Moral Burden
In any democracy, the ruling party naturally accumulates immense power. This power, unchecked, can gradually slip into arrogance and authoritarianism. Which is precisely why the responsibility of protecting democratic norms does not lie with the ruling party — it lies with the opposition.
A committed opposition does not participate in a compromised election merely to stay visible. It confronts the system, questions it, and reshapes it when necessary.
India has witnessed such moral stands in the past, whether during the Emergency or in the years of electoral reform movements. The current moment demands a similar level of courage. When the electoral field is uneven, and when the referee himself appears partisan, the only meaningful political weapon available is election boycott.
What a Boycott Could Have Achieved
Had the opposition, led by figures like Rahul Gandhi, announced a boycott of elections conducted under a compromised Commission, the global spotlight would have immediately fallen on India’s democratic health.
A boycott would have sent a powerful message: that democracy is not a ritual, but a principle — and when that principle is threatened, participation becomes collaboration.
Instead, by choosing to compete under disputed conditions, the opposition inadvertently strengthened the very institution it accused of partiality.
The Cost of Silence
India is celebrated as the world’s largest democracy — and rightly so.
But size is not synonymous with strength.
Today, the face of that democracy appears increasingly strained, distorted and, in moments, disfigured. The world must confront not only the magnitude of Indian democracy but also its current fragility.
This is not a partisan argument. It is a democratic warning. When electoral institutions become opaque and the opposition becomes cautious, democracy begins to hollow out from within. The structures remain, but the spirit weakens.
Conclusion
For now, I pause this analysis. But the story is far from over. In the next piece, I will present a factual and practical blueprint — a roadmap to counter electoral manipulation, restore transparency, and re-establish the moral authority of the democratic process.
Democracy is not defended merely through elections.
It is defended through courage, clarity and, when necessary, non-cooperation.
(Cover Photo Credit: Election Commission of India Facebook)
BiharDemocracyECIElectionElection CommissionElection Commission of IndiaIndiaPolitical PartiesPoliticsrahul gandhiVote TheftVoteChori