On September 15, 2025, the International Day of Democracy was marked in India by a fiery political debate, as Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge leveled grave accusations against the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological parent, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Kharge’s statements, delivered through a series of posts on the social platform X and in an official statement, have sparked a national conversation about the future of India’s democratic institutions. His central charge: that the BJP is orchestrating a systematic erosion of India’s electoral integrity and, by extension, its democracy.
Kharge did not mince words. “In the past 11 years, a conspiratorial attempt has been made by the RSS-BJP to hollow out India’s long-cherished and painstakingly built Democracy,” he declared, according to PTI and Editorji. The Congress president’s remarks come in the wake of a series of legislative proposals and administrative actions that, he contends, threaten the very core of India’s constitutional order.
At the heart of Kharge’s concerns is the recently introduced 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, which he described as a legislative “Trojan Horse.” The bill, along with two others—the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill 2025 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2025—was brought to the Lok Sabha last month by Home Minister Amit Shah. If enacted, these bills would allow for the removal of the prime minister, Union ministers, or state chief ministers if they are arrested and detained continuously for 30 days on charges carrying a minimum five-year sentence. On the 31st day, their positions would be forfeit, regardless of the legal process still underway.
The opposition’s reaction was swift and furious. As reported by PTI, the introduction of the bills was met with intense protests in Parliament, with some MPs reportedly tearing up copies of the proposed laws. The bills have since been referred to a Joint Committee of Parliament for further scrutiny—a move that, while procedural, has done little to assuage the fears of those who see them as a threat to federalism and democratic norms.
Kharge’s argument, echoed in his social media posts and official statements, is that the amendment bill could be weaponized by the central government to topple opposition-led state governments under the pretext of fighting corruption. “This proposal lets the Centre topple elected State governments by labeling them ‘corrupt,’ conveniently judged by agencies already under the BJP’s grip,” he warned. The implication is clear: with investigative agencies allegedly influenced by the ruling party, the threshold for removing elected leaders could become dangerously subjective. “Why bother with elections when you can legally bulldoze elected Chief Ministers within 30 days?” Kharge asked, underscoring his fear that the electoral process itself could be rendered moot.
But the Congress president’s critique did not stop at legislative maneuvering. He accused the BJP of directly undermining the rights of voters, particularly those from vulnerable communities. Citing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in Bihar, Kharge alleged that large numbers of people—especially from marginalized backgrounds—have been disenfranchised under the guise of cleaning up the electoral rolls. “The BJP is coming for the voter directly. Electoral manipulation, dressed up as ‘reform’ is being used as a tool for snatching the all-important Right to Vote enshrined in our Constitution,” he stated, as reported by Editorji.
Kharge also referenced what he termed “vote theft” exposed by senior Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. While the details of these allegations were not elaborated in the statements, the charge forms part of a broader narrative advanced by the opposition: that the BJP is using both legislative and administrative tools to tilt the playing field in its favor, often at the expense of democratic norms and the rights of ordinary citizens.
On the International Day of Democracy, Kharge issued a call to action. “So, on this International Day of Democracy, let us reaffirm our pledge to save our Constitutional Institutions from the clutches of RSS-BJP,” he urged, according to his statement on X. For Kharge and his party, the moment demands not just political opposition, but a broader societal commitment to safeguarding the institutions that underpin Indian democracy.
The BJP, for its part, has defended the proposed amendments as necessary steps to ensure accountability among public officials. The government argues that leaders accused of serious crimes should not be allowed to remain in office while under prolonged detention, a stance that resonates with some segments of the public who are weary of corruption scandals and political impunity. Yet, critics warn that the timing and breadth of these measures raise red flags about their true intent.
Underlying this clash is a deeper debate about the balance of power in India’s federal system. The ability of the Centre to remove state leaders—especially through agencies perceived as partisan—has long been a flashpoint in Indian politics. The current controversy revives memories of past confrontations between central and state governments, and stirs anxieties about the erosion of state autonomy.
Kharge’s warnings also highlight the evolving nature of electoral manipulation. While outright ballot-stuffing or vote-rigging is increasingly rare, opposition leaders allege that more sophisticated forms of interference—such as targeted disenfranchisement or the misuse of investigative agencies—are on the rise. The Special Intensive Revision process in Bihar, cited by Kharge, is emblematic of these new battlegrounds, where the lines between legitimate reform and partisan maneuvering can blur.
In the days following Kharge’s statements, political analysts have noted that the controversy is likely to intensify as the bills move through Parliament. With the opposition united against what it sees as an existential threat, and the government determined to press ahead, the stage is set for a high-stakes showdown that could shape the contours of Indian democracy for years to come.
For many ordinary Indians, the debate may feel distant—yet, as Kharge and his supporters argue, the stakes could hardly be higher. The right to vote, the independence of constitutional institutions, and the delicate balance between central and state authority are all on the line. Whether the current storm will pass or leave a lasting mark on the world’s largest democracy remains to be seen.
