By Baiamutlang Khymdeit
The Preamble to the Constitution of India proudly declares:
“We, the People of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic and to secure to all its citizens: Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”
The word “Democratic Republic” is not merely a constitutional phrase. It represents the promise that the people of India are the true custodians of democracy. It assures every citizen the right to express opinions freely, assemble peacefully, question those in power, and participate in shaping the nation’s future. These ideals are further protected under Article 19 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression, the right to assemble peacefully without arms, and the right to form associations.
Yet, as I watch the events unfolding in our capital today, I find myself asking a question that many Indians are quietly asking, Is India still living up to its constitutional promise as a democratic republic?
The recent movement at Jantar Mantar has reignited this debate. The protest, led by the student organisation Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) along with renowned engineer and education reformer Sonam Wangchuk, demanded reforms in India’s education system. Students alleged that recurring examination paper leaks, irregularities in competitive examinations, inadequate educational infrastructure, and the lack of accountability within educational institutions have eroded public trust. Their movement called for transparency, fairness, quality education, and meaningful reforms to protect the future of millions of young Indians.
Education is not a privilege reserved for a few. it is the foundation upon which every democratic society is built. When students take to the streets demanding a better education system, they are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for the government to fulfil its constitutional responsibility towards the youth of this country.
Sonam Wangchuk is not an ordinary activist. He is one of India’s most respected engineers, innovators, education reformers and environmentalists. His innovative Ice Stupa technology has become an internationally recognised solution for water conservation in the Himalayan region. His sustainable engineering innovations have also benefited local communities and provided practical solutions for the Indian Army stationed in extreme high-altitude areas. This is a man who has dedicated his life to serving India, not through politics, but through education, science, innovation, and nation-building. Yet, when he chose to support students by undertaking an indefinite hunger strike, a method deeply rooted in India’s democratic tradition, he became the subject of fierce criticism. Many voices on social media questioned his patriotism and labelled him anti-national simply because he stood with students demanding reform.
I ask myself: What exactly was his crime? He did not call for violence, he did not call for hatred, he did not call for the overthrow of the government. He simply exercised his democratic right to peacefully protest. And after more than twenty days of fasting at Jantar Mantar, he was removed from the protest site by the authorities and taken to hospital. Whether one agrees with the government’s reasons or not, the incident raised serious questions about how peaceful democratic dissent is being handled in modern India.
Moreover, the events of July 20 made those questions even more urgent. As we saw through the media, thousands of students began a peaceful march from Jantar Mantar towards Parliament, hoping their voices would finally be heard. Instead, the march was stopped by the police. Reports and videos from the protest showed police using barricades, lathi charges and tear gas as they attempted to disperse the crowd. Watching those scenes, I could not help but ask: Is peacefully demanding educational reform now considered a threat? Is exercising our constitutional right to peaceful assembly wrong? Is criticising government policies now unacceptable in the world’s largest democracy?
We all know that Democracy is not measured only by the conduct of elections. Elections may determine who governs us, but democracy determines how those in power treat those who disagree with them. A government confident in its democratic legitimacy should welcome criticism, not fear it. It should answer peaceful protests with dialogue rather than force.
Across India, many citizens have also expressed concern over restrictions affecting certain online voices and public figures critical of government policies. Regardless of the legal reasons behind individual cases, the broader perception that dissenting voices face increasing pressure should concern every citizen. Democracy flourishes when diverse opinions coexist, not when disagreement becomes something people fear.
As Indians, we often take pride in remembering our freedom struggle. During British rule, countless Indians were imprisoned, lathi-charged and silenced simply because they demanded freedom. Today, independent India is fundamentally different from colonial India, but any instance where peaceful protesters are met with excessive force naturally reminds us of a painful chapter in our history. Our freedom fighters did not sacrifice their lives merely so that Indians could vote every five years. They fought so that every citizen could live with dignity, liberty and justice. They envisioned an India where governments would remain accountable to the people, not the other way around.
Democracy does not weaken when citizens question authority. It weakens when citizens become afraid to do so. The Constitution never promised us a government that would always be right. It promised us the freedom to question any government whenever we believed it had gone wrong. If peaceful protest becomes difficult, if criticism is increasingly viewed with suspicion and if young people demanding educational reforms are met with force instead of dialogue, then we must honestly ask ourselves whether we are preserving the spirit of the Constitution or merely its words.
I write this not out of hatred for my country, but out of love for it. True patriotism is not blind obedience. True patriotism is believing that India can be better, and having the courage to say so. The Preamble begins with the words “We, the People of India.” Those words remind us that democracy belongs to the people, not to any political party, government, ideology or individual.
If we can no longer question those in power, if we can no longer peacefully assemble to seek justice, if we begin to fear exercising the very rights guaranteed by our Constitution, then the question before us becomes unavoidable: Is India still the democratic republic our Constitution promised it would be?
(The author is Assistant Professor Political Science Dept., Ri Bhoi Synod College)
