India's Democracy at a Crossroads: Crisis or Evolution?

The Human Rights Situation in India: A Balancing Act Between Democracy and Suppression

India, the world’s largest democracy, stands as a beacon of democratic values with its vibrant political system and constitutional guarantees of civil liberties. However, under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the country’s human rights record has come under increasing scrutiny. Despite the Indian Constitution’s protections of free expression, religion, and association, alarming trends in political persecution, marginalization of minorities, and suppression of dissent have raised concerns about the health of India’s democracy. The situation in Indian-administered Kashmir, in particular, highlights the severity of these issues. While the country has made significant strides in electoral democracy and governance, challenges remain in the areas of civil liberties, political pluralism, and the protection of minority rights. This report delves into the current state of human rights in India, focusing on political rights, civil liberties, and the intricate balance between progress and setbacks.

A Changing Political Landscape in India

While India remains a multiparty democracy, the political atmosphere has become increasingly fraught with tensions. The BJP, a party with deep ties to Hindu nationalism, has spearheaded policies that many argue target India’s Muslim minority, deepening religious polarization. In regions like Kashmir, the Modi government has taken a hardline approach, invoking controversial legislation and tactics that significantly undermine the freedoms and rights of the local population. These developments reflect a growing authoritarian streak that runs counter to India’s constitutional values.

A pivotal moment in this shift came with the BJP’s handling of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) documentary examining Prime Minister Modi’s role in the 2002 Gujarat riots. The government invoked emergency powers to restrict access to the documentary, which many saw as an effort to suppress scrutiny of Modi’s actions during his time as Chief Minister of Gujarat. The subsequent raids on BBC offices by tax officials in February 2023 only reinforced perceptions of a government intolerant of criticism, both from domestic and international actors.

Similarly, the disqualification of opposition leader Rahul Gandhi from Parliament for defaming Modi raised concerns about the government’s use of legal avenues to target political rivals. Though Gandhi’s conviction was later suspended, allowing him to return to Parliament, the case illustrates the increasing politicization of India’s institutions.

Persecution of Minorities and Marginalized Groups

Beneath the surface of political conflict lies a deeper issue: the economic and social marginalization of India’s Muslim population, as well as its scheduled castes (Dalits) and scheduled tribes (Adivasis). The rise of Hindu nationalism has worsened the vulnerability of these groups, who face discrimination, violence, and exclusion.

One particularly egregious example is the violence in Manipur in 2023, where clashes between Hindu and Christian residents resulted in over 160 deaths and the displacement of 40,000 people. This conflict was sparked by the inclusion of a Hindu ethnic group in the list of scheduled tribes, a designation that provides certain legal protections and quotas. As with many such communal clashes, it revealed the fragility of India’s social fabric, where religious and ethnic tensions can escalate into deadly violence.

While India’s legal framework offers protections for minorities, enforcement remains weak. Muslims, Dalits, and Adivasis continue to experience higher rates of poverty, lack of access to education, and fewer employment opportunities. These systemic inequalities perpetuate cycles of violence and disenfranchisement, making economic and social justice an essential component of any future human rights reforms in India.

The Repression of Dissent in Jammu and Kashmir

Nowhere is the erosion of civil liberties more pronounced than in Indian-administered Kashmir. Following the Modi government’s 2019 decision to revoke Article 370, which granted the region semi-autonomous status, the situation in Kashmir has deteriorated rapidly. Reports of arbitrary detentions, travel bans, and restrictions on freedom of expression have become commonplace, as the Indian government seeks to suppress dissent in the region.

The Public Safety Act (PSA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) have been wielded as tools to silence critics. The PSA allows for detention without charge or trial for up to two years, and its use in Kashmir has surged since 2019. In Muslim-majority areas like Srinagar, courts have seen a sharp increase in cases, while Hindu-majority regions remain less affected. This disparity points to a selective application of these laws that disproportionately impacts Kashmir’s Muslim population.

The Indian government’s suppression of Kashmiri journalists and activists further exacerbates the situation. The case of photojournalist Masrat Zahra, whose passport was revoked while she was studying in the United States, highlights the extent to which the Indian state is willing to go to prevent critical voices from emerging. Zahra’s experience of being forced into self-censorship for fear of further retaliation speaks to the suffocating climate of repression in the region.

Beyond individuals, entire institutions have been targeted. The Jammu and Kashmir Court Bar Association, a key defender of legal rights in the region, has seen its leaders, such as Mian Abdul Qayoom, detained under the PSA. Their “crime” is often nothing more than providing legal aid to those accused of being “anti-national,” revealing the government’s desire to stifle even legal avenues for dissent.

A Global Dimension: Repression Beyond Borders

India’s human rights violations have not been confined to its borders. The government has employed a range of tactics to silence critics abroad, particularly those of Kashmiri origin. The revocation of Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) status for individuals like Nitasha Kaul, a British professor of Kashmiri origin, exemplifies this transnational repression. Kaul’s advocacy for human rights in Kashmir led to her OCI status being canceled, barring her from entering India and effectively silencing her voice.

Such cases signal a troubling trend where the Indian government uses its bureaucratic power to suppress dissent, even when it originates outside the country. These moves not only violate the rights of individuals but also contribute to the perception that India is willing to disregard international norms in its quest to control the narrative around Kashmir.

The Path Forward: Restoring Human Rights and Democratic Freedoms

India’s approach to dissent and political opposition, particularly in Kashmir, stands in stark contrast to its image as a democratic republic. To restore faith in its democratic institutions, India must take immediate steps to end the repression in Kashmir and across the country. This includes releasing individuals detained under the PSA and UAPA, allowing freedom of movement, and lifting restrictions on freedom of expression.

Furthermore, India must ensure that future elections in Kashmir are free, fair, and inclusive. The ongoing marginalization of critical voices undermines the democratic process, making any political resolution in the region impossible without significant reforms.

At the heart of these challenges lies a choice for India: continue down a path of increased authoritarianism, or recommit to the democratic principles that have defined the nation since its independence. The world is watching, and the people of India, particularly those in marginalized communities and regions like Kashmir, deserve a future where their rights are respected and their voices heard.

Political Rights and Electoral Integrity

India’s electoral process is generally regarded as free and fair, serving as a cornerstone of its democratic identity. The selection of the head of government—the prime minister—through transparent and competitive elections reinforces the legitimacy of the political system. Narendra Modi’s reelection in 2019 underscored the robust nature of the country’s democratic institutions, while the election of Droupadi Murmu as president in 2022 marked a historic moment for India’s marginalized tribal communities. The legislative framework is similarly resilient, with the Lok Sabha elections of 2019 enjoying high voter turnout and generally being free of systemic issues.

However, concerns have arisen over the increasing concentration of power in the hands of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). While opposition parties are free to organize and compete, the dominance of the BJP—partially fueled by opaque financing mechanisms such as electoral bonds—has raised questions about the fairness of political competition. These bonds allow donors to remain anonymous to the public, which critics argue undermines transparency and creates an uneven playing field. Furthermore, the selective use of government agencies, such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate, to target opposition leaders while sparing political allies has further fueled concerns about the impartiality of state institutions.

The 2023 amendment granting the prime minister greater control over the appointment of Election Commission of India (ECI) officials is another worrying sign. While India’s electoral system remains largely credible, these developments have prompted critics to warn of creeping authoritarianism and the weakening of democratic checks and balances.

Political Pluralism and Minority Representation

India’s political system accommodates a wide range of parties, representing diverse interests across regions, ethnicities, and religions. The regular alternation of power in states and the presence of strong regional parties attests to the competitive nature of Indian politics. However, political participation is not entirely free from external influences. Insurgent violence in certain areas, coupled with communal tensions stoked by political actors, hampers the free exercise of political rights.

Despite constitutional protections, minority groups, particularly Muslims, face systemic obstacles in securing proportional political representation. While Muslims constitute 14.2% of the population, they held just 5% of the seats in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. The fact that no Muslim representatives serve in the BJP’s ranks in the national legislature highlights the marginalization of this community within the ruling party. Moreover, the 2019 Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the proposed national register of citizens have sparked fears of disenfranchisement among Muslims, exacerbating their political vulnerability. The CAA fast-tracks citizenship for non-Muslim refugees, raising concerns about its discriminatory intent.

The recent passage of the Women’s Reservation Bill, which aims to reserve one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies for women, marks a progressive step toward gender equality in political representation. However, practical barriers remain, particularly for women from marginalized groups, and the timeline for implementation is uncertain due to the delayed national census.

Corruption and Transparency

Corruption remains a pervasive issue in Indian governance, with large-scale scandals periodically emerging. The enforcement of anti-corruption laws, while in place, is often selective and partisan, with opposition politicians bearing the brunt of investigations while allies of the ruling party are rarely scrutinized. Institutions like the Lokpal, established to combat corruption, have been largely ineffective due to understaffing and lengthy vacancies in key positions.

Transparency, a fundamental pillar of accountability, has also eroded in recent years. The Right to Information (RTI) Act, once hailed as a powerful tool for citizen oversight, has been weakened. Amendments to the RTI Act in 2019 brought the salaries and tenure of information commissioners under government control, undermining their independence. Moreover, the introduction of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA) in 2023 has further curtailed access to information by exempting personal data from the RTI Act’s scope, raising concerns about government surveillance and accountability.

Civil Liberties and Freedom of Expression

Freedom of the press in India has faced unprecedented challenges under the Modi administration. The media, while vibrant and diverse, operates under increasing pressure. Investigative journalism has declined, and the rise of Hindu nationalism has contributed to self-censorship, particularly on sensitive topics related to religion and politics. The government has employed defamation, sedition, and hate-speech laws to suppress critical voices. The raid on the offices of the BBC in early 2023, following the release of a documentary critical of Modi’s role in the 2002 Gujarat riots, exemplifies the state’s efforts to silence dissent.

Moreover, the arrest of Prabir Purkayastha, founder of the independent news outlet NewsClick, highlights the state’s growing intolerance toward media organizations that challenge government narratives. The widespread use of surveillance technology, including the alleged deployment of Pegasus spyware against prominent individuals, has raised serious privacy and civil liberty concerns.

Religious Freedom and Communal Violence

India’s secular constitution guarantees freedom of religion, yet the reality for religious minorities, especially Muslims, is increasingly precarious. Under the Modi government, Hindu nationalist rhetoric has intensified, and religious polarization has grown. Incidents of violence against Muslims, often linked to cow protection vigilantes, have gone largely unpunished, with critics accusing the BJP of tacitly endorsing such actions. Legislation in several states that criminalizes religious conversions under vague terms has further restricted religious freedom, especially for Muslims and Christians.

The communal riots in states like Manipur, where clashes between the Meitei and Kuki communities left hundreds dead and thousands displaced, further illustrate the fragile state of religious and ethnic harmony in India. The government’s response to these incidents has often been criticized as inadequate, exacerbating tensions rather than resolving them.

Academic Freedom and Surveillance

Academic freedom in India has similarly been curtailed, with universities becoming battlegrounds for political and ideological control. Scholars critical of the government face pressure, harassment, and even dismissal. The resignation of economist Sabyasachi Das from Ashoka University after publishing research suggesting electoral manipulation by the BJP in 2019 is emblematic of the chilling effect on academic inquiry. Political indoctrination within educational institutions has increased, with appointments to key academic positions often reflecting loyalty to the ruling party rather than merit.

Moreover, personal expression in both private and public spaces is increasingly under surveillance. The rise of online harassment, particularly against critics of the government, is rampant, with pro-government “troll armies” targeting dissidents. The introduction of new surveillance laws, such as the DPDPA, has expanded the state’s power to monitor citizens’ digital communications without judicial oversight, leading to further erosion of individual freedoms.

Freedom of Assembly and Expression Under Threat

India’s vibrant democratic culture allows peaceful demonstrations, yet the state’s approach to freedom of assembly is marred by legal restrictions and arbitrary enforcement. Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code enables authorities to impose curfews and restrict public gatherings whenever a need for “immediate prevention or speedy remedy” arises. This broad provision often results in the suppression of dissent, particularly during politically sensitive moments.

Recent years have witnessed the government’s use of force to quell protests, particularly in opposition to government policies. The use of internet shutdowns to suppress mobilization during protests is an increasingly common tactic. Protesters are often denied access to legal counsel, exacerbating concerns over fair treatment. In 2019, protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) led to widespread detentions, violence, and internet blackouts, underscoring how laws can be used to stifle assembly under the guise of public order.

NGOs and Human Rights Activism: Navigating a Legal Minefield

The role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) is critical in ensuring human rights are protected and abuses exposed. Yet, NGOs in India, especially those focusing on human rights and governance issues, face substantial obstacles. Legal harassment, intimidation, and even lethal violence have become recurrent issues for organizations involved in uncovering human rights violations.

The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) of 2010 remains a potent tool for the government to exert control over NGOs, as it allows the state to deny or suspend foreign funding. Authorities have been accused of selectively enforcing the FCRA against NGOs seen as politically inconvenient. Between 2017 and 2021, the government canceled the FCRA registrations of 6,677 NGOs. High-profile organizations like Oxfam India and the Centre for Policy Research have been targeted, accused of funding irregularities. These actions raise concerns about the use of legal tools to systematically weaken civil society’s capacity to operate independently, especially when engaging in sensitive issues such as government accountability and human rights.

Labor Rights: Freedom Within Constraints

India’s labor rights landscape offers a mixed picture. While trade unions and labor organizations have a legal framework to operate and bargain collectively, significant restrictions remain, especially in sectors considered essential. The Essential Services Maintenance Act allows the government to ban strikes in certain sectors, limiting workers’ ability to protest against unfair working conditions.

Public employees, in particular, face more restricted rights when it comes to organizing. Additionally, private employers are under no legal obligation to recognize unions or engage in collective bargaining, leaving vast numbers of workers, particularly in the informal sector, vulnerable to exploitation. Although formal economy workers can strike and collectively bargain, the overall environment limits labor freedoms, especially for marginalized workers in the informal sectors, exacerbating inequality.

The Judiciary: Independence or Increasing Politicization?

India’s judiciary has historically been a key pillar of democracy, with the Supreme Court acting independently in public interest litigation cases. However, concerns over politicization have escalated in recent years. While the judiciary is formally independent, lower courts are plagued by corruption, and appointments to higher courts are increasingly seen as politically motivated.

Several high-profile cases raise alarms over the judiciary’s autonomy. For instance, the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision allowing the construction of a Hindu temple on the contested site of a historic mosque was seen as aligning with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) ideological interests. Additionally, the judiciary’s endorsement of the revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s autonomous status in 2023 further fueled concerns of judicial decisions being politically influenced.

The consequences of this politicization extend beyond high-profile cases. Lower courts suffer from delays, inefficiency, and corruption, often leaving marginalized groups without justice. The backlog in courts leads to lengthy pretrial detentions, with many individuals awaiting trial for longer than the potential sentences they might receive. The use of laws like the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), which permits detention without charge, further undermines due process, with only a fraction of cases leading to convictions.

Physical Abuse, Impunity, and Regional Insurgencies

The use of torture and abuse by law enforcement remains a severe issue in India. Reports of custodial torture, extrajudicial killings, and police brutality, particularly against marginalized groups, are commonplace. The National Human Rights Commission documented over 1,799 deaths in police or judicial custody in 2023 alone. The lack of accountability is alarming, with security forces rarely prosecuted for such abuses, even though the criminal procedure code theoretically requires government approval for such prosecutions.

Regional insurgencies, particularly the Maoist conflict and violence in northeastern India, further exacerbate the human rights situation. Government forces and insurgent groups have both been implicated in severe abuses, including extrajudicial killings, kidnappings, and the destruction of homes. Civilians caught between state forces and insurgent groups often face the brunt of violence, with tens of thousands displaced and human rights violations rampant in conflict zones.

Discrimination and Violence Against Marginalized Groups

Despite constitutional provisions that outlaw caste-based discrimination and other forms of inequality, marginalized groups in India, including Dalits, tribal communities, and women, continue to suffer from violence and systematic discrimination. Violence against scheduled-caste women is particularly egregious, as demonstrated by high-profile rape cases such as the 2023 Manipur gang-rape incident, where justice was delayed despite public outcry.

India has made strides in expanding protections for women and LGBT+ communities, with the 2018 Supreme Court decision decriminalizing same-sex intercourse as a notable example. However, systemic discrimination remains entrenched, with women and other minorities often denied equal protection under the law. Traditional practices such as dowry demands, domestic violence, and child marriage persist, further perpetuating gender inequality.

In short, India’s human rights situation is at a crossroads. The democratic ideals enshrined in its constitution are being tested by the Modi government’s increasing centralization of power and its harsh measures against political dissent and marginalized communities. Legal restrictions on assembly and the increasing harassment of NGOs, coupled with concerns over judicial independence, expose the fragile state of civil liberties. At the same time, systemic violence and discrimination continue to undermine the rights of marginalized populations. Addressing these challenges requires not only legal reforms but also political will to create a more just and equal society. Nowhere is this more evident than in Kashmir, where the revocation of Article 370 has set off a chain of repressive actions that undermine the region’s democratic future. If India is to maintain its global reputation as a democracy, it must address these human rights concerns, ensuring that its policies reflect the principles of justice, equality, and freedom for all.