To get a grasp on contemporary Indian politics and culture, I usually turn to three voices on social media. Chandril Bhattacharya of West Bengal offers unmatched depth on philosophy, literature, Rabindranath Tagore, and the Bengali psyche. For political affairs, Akash Banerjee of The Deshbhakt provides sharp commentary. Then there is Dhruv Rathee, who occupies a tier entirely of his own.
Few commentators globally produce digital videos across diverse subjects with the research intensity Rathee exhibits, commanding a massive worldwide audience of sixty million followers.
Curiously, on international affairs such as Palestine and the broader Middle East, few commentators across the Muslim world prove as outspoken as Banerjee and Rathee. Yet the political landscape has shifted dramatically with the Modi administration’s recent arrest of Rathee, a German citizen who returned to answer his homeland's call.
In a striking display of state authority, security personnel boarded an aircraft to detain a figure affiliated with opposition movements, arresting him directly on the plane rather than within the airport terminal.
Simultaneously, Umar Khalid, originally detained during the 2020 student protests at Jawaharlal Nehru University, has re-emerged as a central symbol of resistance. Imprisoned for six years without trial, Khalid remains behind bars while recently receiving the prestigious international Front Line Defenders Award for human rights.
This comes after widespread demonstrations organized around educational reforms severely tested the ruling party. Though the government survived that initial wave, the political upheaval noticeably weakened its institutional grip.
The current wave of public anger targets India’s Chief Election Commissioner, Gyanesh Kumar. Opponents level three core grievances against the electoral authority. First, critics point to the wholesale removal of voters from electoral rolls via the Special Intensive Revision process, arguing that vast swathes of legitimate citizens risk disenfranchisement.
Second, opposition figures allege that these revisions systematically favor Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, drawing uncomfortable parallels to electoral engineering seen elsewhere in South Asia where election commissions redrew boundaries to secure partisan advantage.
Third, internal friction has damaged the commission's facade of neutrality, with reports indicating that the other two commissioners raised formal objections at least fourteen times over ten months regarding administrative decisions and roll revisions.
Predictably, both the Election Commission and the ruling party deny any wrongdoing, maintaining that the revisions merely eliminate deceased, duplicate, and ineligible voters. Nevertheless, protesters demand three specific remedies: the resignation or removal of Gyanesh Kumar, an independent investigation into roll irregularities, and the immediate reinstatement of disenfranchised citizens.
Consequently, India finds itself gripped by another momentous protest movement, leaving Prime Minister Modi in a delicate constitutional bind. Under the Indian Constitution, removing a Chief Election Commissioner requires a process as rigorous as removing a Supreme Court judge; street pressure alone cannot legally unseat him.
Conversely, acceding to demands for his removal would tacitly validate allegations of systematic electoral manipulation. Facing this dilemma, the administration has chosen an unyielding stance, deploying familiar tactics of state control: internet blackouts, sweeping arrests, and the widespread deployment of paramilitary forces. The situation remains precarious, as any escalation into lethal force would irrevocably alter the political calculus.
Yet amid this unrest, a historical pattern persists. Just as certain factions in neighboring countries aligned with authoritarian regimes to maintain status quo, similar dynamics appear among self-styled loyalist groups in India. Although the current electoral roll revisions disproportionately affect minority communities, particular religious figures and loyalists actively issue directives urging citizens to abstain from public demonstrations.
Fortunately, youth movements across the globe exhibit a shared resilience against such pacification. Had previous generational movements heeded the calls of conservative appeasers, authoritarian structures would remain unchallenged. There is strong reason to believe that India's younger generation will similarly disregard calls for quietism.
Indian democracy stands at a pivotal historical junction. At this critical juncture, the active participation of all democratic demographic groups remains essential to shaping the country's political trajectory.
As autocratic governance faces increasing scrutiny across the region, the ultimate hope remains that representative institutions accountable to the public will triumph over executive overreach, ensuring that power ultimately rests in the hands of the citizenry.
—
Sagor Hasnath is a former government employee turned-entrepreneur. He is the CEO of Ahlan Agro