Round The World

New Delhi, 26 February 2024

Greek PM in India

DRAWING NEW DELHI IN

By Prof. (Dr.) D.K. Giri

(Secretary General, Assn for Democratic Socialism) 

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis recent visit to New Delhi was significant as it underlined the critical need for both countries to come together. Besides, the visit came after 15 years by a head of the state or head of government of Greece. The last Greek prime minister visit occurred in 2008. Also, during this visit, India and Greece initiated or renewed ground-breaking partnerships and projects. 

The process of deepening the bilateralism had begun last year in August when Prime Minister Modi had visited Greece. That visit was equally or more significant as any Indian Prime Minister had been to Athens 40 years ago. During Modi’s visit, India-Greece relations were upgraded to a strategic partnership. It was also decided that the bilateral trade will be doubled by 2030. Thus, Modi’s visit marked a historic occasion when he was conferred the highest civilian award of Greece, Grand Cross of the Order of Honour by President Katerina Sakellaropoulou. 

Mitsotakis who was on a two-day official visit and was the chief guest and keynote speaker at the Raisina Dialogue, 2024, said, “PM Modi’s historic visit to Athens created a momentum which will be accelerated by his visit to India”. He was emphatic and optimistic about India and Greece relations. He said to a Greek journalist Alexis Papahalas on the eve of his departure to India, “India will find no better gateway to Europe than my country and for Greece, there is no better gateway to Asia than a close strategic relationship with India”. 

Mitsotakis made a forceful plea for proceeding with India-Middle East Economic Corridor (IMEC) despite the continuing conflict in Gaza. This corridor was conceived as a counterweight to Beijing’s BRI which made the participating countries debt-prone and impaired their sovereignty. The founding members of IMEC could not meet due to the war in Gaza. Also, Israel’s Haifa port owned by Indian Adani Group was expected to be a key point for the ship-and-rail route proposed under IMEC. It would start from India’s West Coast through UAE through Saudi Arabia to Jordan and Israel before reaching Greek’s Piraeus port and to the rest of Europe. 

According to a promising statement made by the Greek Prime Minister, “IMEC holds great promise to supercharge connectivity between India and the growth of economies in the Middle-East and Europe. IMEC will be good for the entire world in the long run. Mitsotakis economic reforms in last five years are leading to stability. Greece remains a solid member on Eastern flank of the European Union and in the Eastern Mediterranean. So, IMEC becomes important for Greece. 

India-Greece relations go back to 326 BC when the Greek hero Alexander came up to North-West of Indian Sub-Continent up to Beas River where he fought a battle with Raja Puru of Paurav dynasty. As per the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, 518 identified soldiers of undivided India defending Southern Europe in World War-I were buried in Greece. A Greek national Dimitrios Galanos born in Athens spent 47 years in India. He translated Indians scriptures into Greek language. He also produced a Sanskrit-English-Greek dictionary containing 9000 words. He died on 3 May, 1833 in Varanasi. A Dimitrios Galanos chair of Hellenic studies was set up in Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi in 2000. The famous Gandhara art is believed is to be a fusion of India and Greek art traditions.

Diplomatic relations began in May 1950 with the setting up of Greek Embassy in New Delhi. India opened its Embassy in Athens in 1978. The bilateral relations have been conducted through two instruments: one, Joint Economic Community (JEC) and the other Foreign Office Consultation (FOC). The latter meets alternatively in Delhi and Athens. 

Both the countries have decided to celebrate next year the 75th anniversary of their diplomatic relations. To mark the occasion, it was decided to, “Prepare an action plan that will enable both the countries to showcase their common heritage, science and technology, innovation, sports and other areas on the global stage. 

Both countries are ‘prisoners’ of geography. But their strategic locations are important to the global system and geo-political prosperity. Recent events at Red Sea have demonstrated that the security of East Mediterranean region where Greece is located virtually depends upon the stability of the Indian Ocean region. That is why perhaps Greece decided to join the Indo-Pacific Ocean Initiatives launched by India during its G-20 chairmanship. Greece has the world’s biggest merchant fleet, and its geographical position makes it an obvious partner for the project. 

On trade and commerce, India exports aluminium, organic chemicals, fish and crustaceans, plastics, textile articles, chemicals, iron and steel. It imports from Greece minerals, mineral fuels, oil, sulphur, aluminium foil, mineral oils, lime and cement, products for their distillation, electrical machinery equipment and building stones. 

During the visit of the Greek Prime Minister, who was accompanied by senior officials and business executives, several agreements were signed. These related to collaboration on start-ups, cooperation in shipping and connectivity, collaboration in higher education, support in defence, cyber security, maritime security and counter terrorism. 

In a joint press conference with his counterpart, the Greek Prime Minister said, “We are deepening the strategic cooperation in all spheres from defence to education, culture, tourism, agriculture, trade and investment”. One important agreement was the finalising of a mobility and migration pact to regulate legal migration. This will enable skilled workforce from India to migrate to Greece and contribute to its economy. Another significant agreement was the co-production and co-development of military hardware. 

Already Indian Navy and Air force are conducting joint exercises with Greek Armed Forces. An Indian company is building a new airport on the Island of Crete. An Indian business family has invested in food business in Greece. A shipping company from India is in brokerage firm in Athens, and it looks to be a major player in the Trans-Atlantic shipping market. A Greek bank has joined up with Indian financial institutions to sell mutual funds products globally. But such transactions do not seem to be good enough. More needs to be done. 

Mitsotakis said India should be a corner stone of Europe’s foreign policy. In any case, this is certainly the case for Greece. The leadership in Greece has been pushing for a closer India and EU relations. In particular, Athens is nudging the EU to sign the Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement between EU and India. The year 2024 is crucial for Europe and the world, and so is for Greece and India. 

One hopes that the diplomatic niceties are backed by sincere efforts on both sides. Prime Minister Modi is reaching out to new partners and building fresh contacts. Although India and Greece have been connected since long, it is time they make the partnership robust in their mutual interests.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Round The States

New Delhi,  9 March 2024

J&K ‘Breathing Free’

NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR POLLS!

By Insaf 

Jammu and Kashmir is ‘breathing freely today’. A message that Prime Minister Modi sent out from Srinagar, which incidentally took him four-and-a-half long years to pay a visit since the abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019! Addressing a massive rally at Bakshi stadium on Thursday last, he pledged rapid development in next five years, but steered clear on when the situation would be appropriate for UT elections. Recall, Supreme Court last December asked ECI to conduct Assembly polls by this September. Modi as always took opportunity to hit out at the parties in the region, saying it ‘has been the biggest victim of dynastic politics since independence. Congress misguided the nation about Article 370 but who did it benefit, the people or a few political families?’ 

Predictably, the families hit back. PDP’ Mehbooba Mufti post on X read: ‘Disheartening to see employees being forcibly mobilised to paint a pretty picture that all is well post 2019 and that people here are celebrating their own collective disempowerment and humiliation,’ This visit, she said was only meant to address and drum support amongst BJP’s core constituency in the rest of India for the upcoming Parliament elections’. NC’s Omar Abdullah accused the administration of ‘pulling out all stops' to ensure a crowd for Modi's rally and that BJP wouldn’t be able to do so on its own in Kashmir. Time will tell which way the wind eventually blows. As said, the taste of the pudding is in its eating and the first bite should be of having a democratically elected government returning to the Valley.

*                                   *                                               *                                               * 

Judicial Propriety 

Calcutta High Court judge Abhijit Gangopadhyay joining the BJP 48 hours after resigning from the bench, has raised a big question on judicial objectivity and propriety. “Today, I have joined a new field. I am happy to join the BJP and will work as a party soldier. Our objective is to oust the corrupt TMC regime from the state,” he said on Thursday last. The statement has given Mamata Banerjee a handle to stir up his controversial rulings, including on various education-related matters and orders which led to 14 CBI probes and arrest of four of its MLAs. Said she: ‘While occupying the chair of justice, the BJP babu announced he would join the party. Can anyone expect justice from such people? Every single day, they accept a PIL and work under the BJP’s instructions”, adding “I am happy their masks are finally off.” Claiming his judgements were wrong, she warned ‘the youths will not forgive you. We will ensure your defeat. From tomorrow onwards, the people of the state will act as the judge for your actions.” Guess, his fight against TMC government will not be a cake walk, as he will no longer have the protection of the bench!     

*                                   *                                               *                                               * 

HP Damage Control

Will Congress be able to put its house in order in Himachal Pradesh? Chief Minister Sukhwinder Sukhu flew into Delhi on Thursday last to hold meetings with High Command to douse the fire, allegedly lit by ‘BJP and Centre to destabilise a democratically elected government.’ Efforts are on to see the Cabinet’s resolution ‘state government completes a full five-year term,’ works out, including Sukhu willing to reconsider disqualification of 6 MLAs who helped BJP nominee win the Rajya Sabha seat and bring them back. The big question is whether the ‘rebels’ are on the same page. One, former minister’s, also removed as Secretary, AICC, Facebook post read: “When high command turns blind and those in power become dictators, then I couldn’t have remained silent like a coward. Our responsibility is towards fulfilling aspirations of people who elected us and we can’t break their confidence.” Another MLA, who resigned as state working president posted: ‘Running from Sujanpur to Shimla and from Shimla to Delhi with folded hands for fulfilment of promises made by Congress in the run-up to last Assembly polls didn’t yield results. I wished for justice but got only humiliation.’ The High Command would do well to see the writing on the wall.   

*                                   *                                               *                                               * 

Breather For Kerala

Kerala can heave a sigh of relief. The Supreme Court on Wednesday last directed the Centre to allow the cash-strapped state to borrow Rs 13,608 crore on an immediate basis. Plus, both parties should hold talks to sort out the issue of borrowings, as the State was struggling to pay salaries of government employees and pension to retired employees. Importantly, the court observed that fiscal mismanagement by states is an issue the Central government has to be concerned about as it impacts the nation’s economy, while hearing a suit filed by Kerala government accusing the Union of India of interfering in exercise of its ‘exclusive, autonomous and plenary powers’ to regulate the state’s finances by imposing a ceiling on borrowing. Importantly, the court didn’t agree with Centre’s condition the State withdraw the suit to consider its demand saying it’s a ‘constitutional right under Article 131’, which allows it to deal with disputes between Centre and a state or between states. Further it advised, the dialogue must continue for ‘that’s the strength of the relationship between Union and the state.’ A piece of advice which could halt the ‘federalism’ war unleashed by New Delhi, of course if accepted.  

*                                   *                                               *                                               * 

Failure of Justice

Three cheers to Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court. It has made correction, albeit a decade later. Acquitting former Delhi University professor G.N. Saibaba and five others in an alleged ‘terrorist’ case in 2014, the bench trashed the prosecution’s claims saying the sanction given under UAPA was without application of mind and the report recommending invocation of UAPA provisions was ‘cryptic and a laconic half page communication.’ The state had claimed the accused were members of banned Communist Party of India (Maoist) after seizing pamphlets and electronic data from the accused. This said the bench merely demonstrated they were ‘sympathisers’ of Maoist philosophy and can’t be itself contemplated as an offence under the UAPA. Plus, the trial court’s ‘guilty’ verdict was a “failure of justice.” Indeed, as Saibaba on his release said ‘…Why has it drawn so long? Ten years of my life and my co-accused’s life. Who will bring them back?... I couldn’t pull up, move out of my wheelchair, go to the toilet (on my own), take a bath. It’s a wonder that I came out of the prison alive today.” Unfortunately, it wasn’t the case for the 6^th person, who died in August 2022 awaiting a verdict. As rightly said: Justice delayed is justice denied. ---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

REWIND

Now Delhi, 7 March 2024

WHO IS TO FIX THE POLL DATE?

By Inder Jit

(Released on 23 October 1984) 

Speculation on the next Lok Sabha poll continues. Mrs Gandhi has stated more than once that the general election will be held "according to schedule". The Congress-I Working President, Mr Kamlapati Tripathi, has been more specific and largely confirmed what I wrote a fortnight back. The poll, he has indicated, will be held in the last week of December or in the first work of January. But the people at large are not satisfied. They want the precise dates and are unable to understand why Mrs Gandhi chooses to be vague and talks in parables. The reason is not far to see. Strictly, the poll dates are neither to be fixed by the Government nor announced by it -- contrary to a widespread but erroneous impression. The responsibility for both is wholly and exclusively that of the Election Commission, which is an independent statutory authority under the Constitution. The poll body may have consulted the Government in the past informally or formally. But it is not obliged to do so.

What precisely is the implication of Mrs Gandhi's remark that the poll will be held "according to schedule". Broadly, it implies a poll before the present Lok Sabha completes its five-year term on January 20, 1995. However, some experts draw attention to the fact that there is no provision in the Constitution which specifically requires a general election for the Lok Sabha to be held within six months of the dissolution of the House. True, six general elections have been held so far within six months. However, this has been so because of the good sense of the Prime Ministers and the Chief Election Commissioners -- and their willingness to accept the six-month period as an implication of Article 85 of the Constitution and another provision which stipulates that there shall be a Lok Sabha. Article 85 lays down: "The President shall from time to time summon each House of Parliament to meet at such time and place as he thinks fit but six months shall not intervene between its last sitting in on session and the date appointed for its sitting in the next session."

This has been interpreted to mean that the new Lok Sabha must meet within six months of the last session of the dissolved House. Yet, according to some experts, the Article does not necessarily make it mandatory for the poll to be held within six months. The Article, they point out, does not talk of the old dissolved House and the new Lok Sabha. It refers only to two sessions of the House. This silence or ambiguity, they argue, could prove dangerous. The Article could be interpreted in a way as to leave the door wide open for unscrupulous leaders in power to enter into a conspiracy and postpone elections indefinitely with impunity and without violating the Constitution! In fact, some insiders among Parliamentarians recall that the January poll of 1980 might not have been held within six months of the dissolution of the Sixth Lok Sabha but for the "democratic and gentlemanly" approach adopted by Mr Charan Singh, then Prime Minister and the interpretation given to Article 85 by the Chief Election Commissioner, Mr S.L. Shakdher.

Some Lok Dal leaders, including Mr Raj Narain, wanted the elections postponed by month or so to “suit the convenience of the farmers”. But Mr Charan Singh strongly opposed the move as it would have delayed the poll beyond the six month period and even reprimanded them publicly. What is more, he left the timing of the poll for the new Lok Sabha appropriately to the Chief Election Commissioner. Mr Shakdher, for his part, firmly held that Parliament was a continuing body and the six-month period, therefore, applied not only to two sessions of the same House but also to the last session of the dissolved House and the first session of the new House, Undoubtedly, there is no guarantee that the precedents established so far would necessarily be followed. The Constitution contains a lacuna which could be exploited to delay a general election beyond six months. (In 1979, another loophole enabled Mr Charan Singh to head a Government for six months without facing the Lok Sabha even once!) But conventions are often more important than the written word.

Alas, ignorance persists even where the Constitution is clear. The Election Commission is a case in point. The founding fathers were clear that free and fair elections were the bedrock of democracy and, therefore, created an independent Election Commission which would function without fear or favour. Accordingly, Article 324(1) of the Constitution provides: "The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislatures of every State and of elections to the office of President and Vice- President held under this Constitution shall be vested in a Commission (referred to in this Constitution as the Election Commission)." The founding fathers also ensured the independence of the Commission by providing that "the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in like manner and on like grounds as a judge of the Supreme Court." Further, they provided that "the conditions of service of the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment."

The powers of the Election Commission in regard to three matters -- superintendence, direction and control of elections -- is absolute and cannot be questioned by anyone. (Not many remember that these three words were deliberately and advisedly picked by the founding fathers from Article 14 of the Government of India Act of 1935-- a key article designed to give the Secretary of State absolute power to supervise, direct and control the functioning of the Governor General of India, who was authorised even to act "in his discretion" and "exercise his individual judgment.") In fact, the Supreme Court has already held that the power of the Commission in the superintendence, direction and control is unfettered and over-riding. Parliament has, no doubt, been empowered to legislate on certain aspects of the elections, such as making provision with respect to elections to legislatures. But the crucial point here is this: all such legislation is subject to the absolute power accorded to the Election Commission to conduct a free and fair poll, basic to a healthy democracy.

In practice, the three words -- superintendence, direction and control -- also give the Election Commission two vital far-reaching rights, to virtually legislate and to be informed. The Chief Election Commissioner is empowered to legislate through "direction", implement the legislation through "superintendence" and interpret the legislation through "control". Every little detail in regard to the conduct of elections comes under his overall control, direction and superintendence through Section (6) of Article 324 of the Constitution which provides: "The President, or the Governor of a state, shall, when so requested by the Election Commission, make available to the Election Commission or to a Regional Commissioner such staff as may be necessary for the discharge of the functions conferred on the Election Commission by clause (1)." (italics mine) The word staff does not mean merely officials of clerks of the state. The word embraces everyone under the umbrella of the Centre or the State Government, including the police and the army.

The former Chief Election Commissioner ordered a repoll in the by-election to the Lok Sabha from Garhwal in 1981 on the ground that outside police force had been inducted into the constituency without his knowledge. Mrs Gandhi made light of Mr Shakdher's emphasis on his right to be informed. But her criticism stemmed from inadequate grasp of the Constitution and the implications of the right to be informed. The right flows from the Constitution itself. How else does the Election Commission exercise its powers of superintendence, direction and control? Again, the right to be informed carries the right to question and, by implication, to control and direct, as in the case of Parliament's sovereign right to know, which makes the question-hour sacrosanct. Churchill, it may be recalled, asked Lord Mountbatten only one question when the latter sought his advice about whether or not he should accept Governor-Generalship of India following independence: "Have you the right of information"? When Mountbatten replied yes, Churchill said: "Fine. Go ahead."

Interestingly, a demand has gone up in Britain for what the London Times describes as an "an independent organisation to oversee all aspects of elections from boundaries to broadcasting." Britain today is alone among the world's democracies which leaves politicians in charge of elections. More and more Britons now feel it is time that they established an Electoral Commission with independent membership "to supervise the electoral process on behalf of the voters and to remove temptation from the politicians." The Commission, it has been suggested, should be appointed by and responsible to Parliament, reporting annually on its work. In an article entitled "Keep Politics out of Polling", Mr Richard Holmes, Director of the all-party Campaign for Electoral Reform, states: "It is time we stopped treating elections as a branch of Government administration. Ministers should take off their referee's shirts, lay down their whistles and become bona fide players in the electoral game."

In the final analysis, our Election Commission is expected to function independently and impartially and is adequately empowered to do so honourably. It is for the Chief Election Commission, Mr R.K. Trivedi and him alone to decide on the dates for the next poll and announce them. It is neither fair nor proper for him to abdicate his responsibility and leave it to the Government to indicate its preference or convenience. As I stated earlier, the Chief Election Commissioner could informally sound the Government leaders or, for that matter, also the Opposition leaders before finally making up his mind. However, he is not obliged to do so. In fact, Mr Shakdher picked January 3 and 6 for the 1980 poll entirely on his own. There was no consultation with Mr Charan Singh or any other government leader. Mr Trivedi should, likewise, make up his mind about the precise timing of the poll and take the country into confidence. Barely three months are now left for the present Lok Sabha to complete five years. The people are entitled to know the poll dates. An announcement is overdue.--INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 6 March 2024 

Electoral Bonds Timing  

SBI’S PLAYS SPOILSPORT?

By Dhurjati Mukherjee 

The State Bank of India has wittingly or unwittingly come to the aid of the Modi government. The much-awaited exposure on who the donors were to the electoral bonds worth Rs 35,660 crore unfortunately will not be known till after the big battle of elections 2024. This as the SBI on Monday last petitioned the Supreme Court to extend the deadline for submitting the details on the purchase of these bonds to the Election Commission of India by June 30, instead of March 6 as directed following the landmark judgement striking down the bond scheme. 

Importantly, the Opposition will not have authentic ammunition, details of the donors which were to go on the ECI website by March 13, to flog its charges against the government of being pro-rich, during the ensuing polls. Some reactions to the SBI plea are worth a mention. The Congress said, “Narendra Modi is leaving no stone unturned to hide the business of donations. When the Supreme Court said it is the right of the people of the country to know the truth about the electoral bonds, then why does SBI not want this information to be made public before the elections?” The CPM said, “This would be a travesty of justice. Is the SBI seeking extension till the general elections are over to protect Modi and the BJP from exposure of the ‘quid pro quo’ that the Supreme Court apprehended. In this digital age, all this information is a mouse-click away. Seeking extension raises suspicious apprehensions.”   

Interestingly, in its plea to the top court the SBI said that while it ‘intends to comply with the directions issued, there are certain practical difficulties with the decoding exercise…due to stringent measures undertaken to ensure that the identity of the donors was kept anonymous…’

Indeed, the timing of the exposé would have played a significant role in these crucial elections and the delay tilts the balance in favour of the government.   

It’s no denying that money power in polls has put a big question mark on the country’s reputation of a vibrant democracy. The availability of vast financial resources, mainly to the ruling dispensation, obviously gives their candidates an unfair advantage over others, leading to an uneven playing field where those with more money dominate the political arena. 

The verdict of the 5-bench constitutional had referred to how large, anonymous donations by the rich to the ruling party can lead to “quid pro quo” in the form of influence over policy making and thus sought details – amount, date, donor and recipient – relating to every electoral bond purchased and cashed over the past six years, since April 2019. 

It was rightly felt that electoral bonds far from curbing black money and preventing money laundering has steeply increased the income of political parties from ‘unknown sources’ to a staggering Rs 11,829 crore during the years 2018-19 to 2021-22. The share of income from unknown sources for national parties rose from 66% during 2014-15 to 2016-17 to 72% during the years 2018-19 to 2021-22. Between 2019-20 and 2021, the bond income has been 81% of the total unknown income of national parties. 

Close on the heels of this development, the Congress wrote to Union Finance Minister Sitharaman citing information available on ECI website, furnished by the BJP itself, which showed how 30 companies hounded by the CBI, IT and ED paid Rs 335 crore to the ruling party in what looks like a quid pro quo. Reports, it said, “suggest that 30 companies embroiled in the net of central agencies which have become extortion agents paid Rs 335 crore donations to the BJP”. The above letter referred to reports that chronicle instances wherein the probe agencies arrested, searched or seized assets of certain companies and later were apparently coerced to donate to the BJP.  

According to the Association for Democratic Reforms, the total funds raised by political parties through electoral bonds between 2017-18 and 2022-23 was around Rs 12,000 crore out of which the BJP’s share was as high as 54.8%. Even if this is considered white money, the party has raised much more money for its expenses, which also includes ‘buying’ legislators and political leaders.     

According to Prof. Atul Sood of the Centre for the Study of Regional Development, JNU, multinational companies were involved in tax abuse to the tune of Rs 75,000 crore per annum.

The pro-corporate ruling party has thus allowed tax concessions of around Rs 1 lakh crore every year to Indian domestic corporate houses but most of these were not increasing their investments. 

Recall that the court verdict pointed out: “Economic inequality leads to differing levels of political engagement because of the deep association between money and politics. At a primary level, political contributions give ‘a seat in the table’ to the contributor”. It had rightly rejected the Centre’s argument that by ensuring anonymity, the scheme not only disincentivised money-laundering and the stashing of black money but granted immunity to the donor from victimisation by parties to which he did not make sufficient donations. 

According to available figures 47% of contributions to parties have been through bonds and 94% of these have been in the denomination of Rs 1 crore. Electoral bonds obviously created a genre of corporate kingmakers, who would have a big say in policy making with an additional incentive of anonymity.  

While the Supreme Court analysed the issue with specific focus on the right to information of citizens to the identity of the donor, which in turn would impact his/her choice of voting, of greater significance is that the judgment has strengthened the constitutional ideal of free and fair elections. Anonymous and exponential funding with no cap is possible only by corporate giants, who could claim illegitimate entry into governance. That money so obtained in donation can be used by political parties for any purpose and not necessarily for election expenditure, makes it not only unjust but also unjustifiable. Will the striking down of the electoral bond scheme make a big difference? Fear is another ingenious scheme would replace it and role of money power, not only in elections but governance itself would remain.       

Whether the country’s political leadership is at all interested in strengthening laws related to campaign, finance and enforcing transparency in political funding will need to be watched. Bolstering independence of institutions like the Election Commission and law enforcement agencies, under question, can be a step towards ensuring what is sought: free and fair elections. 

Addressing such challenges requires a collective effort from citizens, political parties, and the government. Transparency, accountability, and a culture of ethical politics is the need of the hour. It remains to be seen whether India can safeguard its democratic principles in the coming years and halt the political leadership’s schemes to undermine the republic. As said, if there’s a will, there’s a way.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)