Safeguarding the Soul of the Republic
-Bruhaspati Samal-
Republic Day marks the moment when India consciously chose to be governed not by the whims of power, not by the tyranny of the majority, but by the supremacy of the Constitution. The Preamble’s promise of justice — social, economic and political; liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; equality of status and opportunity; and fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual — was meant to be the soul of the Republic. Yet, as the nation stands today, a growing number of citizens feel that this soul is under strain. As India prepares to commemorate yet another Republic Day on January 26, the occasion demands more than ceremonial parades, flag hoisting and patriotic slogans. It demands introspection. It demands honesty. Above all, it demands a sincere reaffirmation of the values enshrined in the Constitution of India — values that were not casually written, but painfully negotiated, debated and dreamt into existence by the founding generation led by Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and many others.
India remains a democracy in form. Elections are held, governments are elected, legislatures function. But democracy is not merely about ballots and majorities. It is about dissent without fear, debate without intimidation, governance with accountability and power restrained by constitutional morality. It is here that serious questions are being raised — questions that cannot be brushed aside as “anti-national” or “politically motivated”. Over the past few years, a disturbing pattern has emerged. Laws with far-reaching consequences for farmers, workers and employees have been introduced and passed with minimal parliamentary discussion, often amid the absence or suspension of opposition voices. The dilution of labour protections through new labour codes, the controversial farm laws that were eventually repealed only after a prolonged and painful farmers’ movement costing hundreds of lives, and the increasing use of ordinances have collectively created an impression that deliberative democracy is being replaced by executive dominance. Parliament, envisioned as the temple of democracy, increasingly appears reduced to a procedural formality rather than a forum of serious debate.
Equally worrying is the shrinking space for dissent. Journalists, academics, students, scientists and activists who question authority or critique policy decisions often find themselves facing legal action. According to independent civil liberties trackers, India has witnessed a sharp rise in cases involving arrests or legal harassment for speech-related activities over the past decade. The use of stringent laws against individuals for expressing opinions has created a chilling effect, where self-censorship replaces free expression. When questioning power becomes risky, democracy begins to hollow out from within.
This erosion of democratic culture becomes even more painful when accompanied by the systematic disrespect shown towards the very founders of the Republic. Mahatma Gandhi, whose philosophy of non-violence inspired global civil rights movements, is increasingly reduced to a token figure, sometimes even mocked or misrepresented in public discourse. Jawaharlal Nehru, who laid the institutional foundations of modern India — from parliamentary democracy to scientific research, from higher education to foreign policy rooted in peace — is often blamed simplistically for complex historical outcomes, stripped of context and nuance. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of the Constitution and a tireless crusader for social justice, is frequently appropriated symbolically while his core ideas of equality, secularism and constitutional morality are ignored or undermined. The disrespect is not always direct; often it is subtle, embedded in narratives that seek to delegitimise their contributions or portray them as obstacles rather than nation-builders. More disturbing is the silence of the state when such remarks are made by influential individuals or groups. When the legacy of the founders is routinely questioned, distorted or insulted under the very nose of the government, it sends a dangerous message — that constitutional values are negotiable, that historical truth can be reshaped for political convenience.
This trend becomes even more alarming in light of repeated attempts, both overt and covert, to question the foundational principles of the Constitution itself. Secularism, which ensures equal respect for all religions and protects minorities from majoritarian excesses, is increasingly portrayed as alien or imposed, despite being integral to India’s pluralistic history. Social justice, championed by Ambedkar to correct centuries of exclusion and inequality, is often dismissed as appeasement. Equality before law, a cornerstone of the Republic, appears compromised when those aligned with power receive leniency while critics face harsh action.
Statistics reinforce these anxieties. India’s position in global indices related to press freedom and civil liberties has declined in recent years, reflecting international concern over the state of democratic freedoms. While such indices are not definitive judgments, they echo domestic experiences voiced by journalists, lawyers and citizens across the country. Rising instances of hate speech, polarisation and political intimidation further weaken the bonds of fraternity that hold the nation together.
The selective application of the law has also shaken public confidence. Cases where individuals accused of serious crimes walk free on bail while dissenters remain incarcerated feed a perception of unequal justice. Democracy cannot survive when equality before law becomes conditional upon political proximity. Ambedkar warned that political democracy without social democracy is a contradiction. His words resonate painfully today, as economic inequality widens and social divisions deepen.
It must be said clearly and without hesitation that criticism of historical leaders is not anti-democratic. Debate and reassessment are essential to intellectual growth. But there is a profound difference between informed critique and deliberate denigration. When Mahatma Gandhi is mocked without understanding his moral philosophy, when Nehru is blamed without acknowledging the historical constraints of a newly independent nation, when Ambedkar is celebrated in statues but ignored in policy, democracy loses its moral compass. A nation that disrespects its founders ultimately disrespects itself. The Constitution was not a gift from rulers; it was a covenant with the people, born from sacrifice and struggle. To manipulate democratic rights while invoking nationalism is to betray that covenant. To silence dissent while celebrating Republic Day is to hollow out its meaning.
As India stands on the threshold of another Republic Day, the question before us is not whether democracy still exists, but what kind of democracy we are becoming. Are we nurturing a republic where disagreement is respected, institutions are independent and history is honoured? Or are we sliding towards a system where power is centralised, voices are subdued and constitutional values are selectively applied? The responsibility to safeguard democracy does not rest solely with governments. Political parties must rise above short-term gains and uphold parliamentary ethics. Institutions must reclaim their independence and credibility. The media must remain vigilant despite pressure. Civil society must continue to speak, question and mobilise. And citizens must remember that rights surrendered silently are rarely regained easily.
Republic Day must not become a ritual devoid of reflection. It must remind us that democracy is not self-sustaining; it requires constant care, courage and commitment. The Constitution is not merely a legal document; it is a moral promise. Honouring Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedkar does not mean idolising them blindly, but protecting the values they stood for — non-violence, reason, equality, justice and fraternity.
In the end, the strength of the Indian Republic will not be measured by the loudness of slogans or the size of majorities, but by its ability to protect the weakest voice, tolerate the strongest dissent and remain faithful to its constitutional soul. This Republic Day, let India choose remembrance over revisionism, democracy over dominance, and constitutional morality over political convenience. Only then will the Republic truly endure.
(The author is a Service Union Representative, currently working as the General Secretary, Confederation of Central Govt. Employees and Workers, Odisha State CoC, President, Forum of Civil Pensioners’ Association, Odisha State Committee, Bhubaneswar and a columnist. eMail: samalbruhaspati@gmail.com)
*******
0 Comments