By Aakar Patel
In 5 March 2021, the Press Information Bureau of the Government of India put out a statement headlined ‘Rebuttal to Freedom House Report on India’s Declining Status as a Free Country’.
Also Read
It was in response to a finding by the US think tank, founded in 1941, that India was not really democratic and was only ‘partly free’. This was one of many similar findings by several respected global institutions. We are focusing on this one because it elicited a response from the government.
The government’s statement opened with a defence of the electoral process and said: ‘Many states in India under its federal structure are ruled by parties other than the one at the national level, through an election process which is free and fair and which is conducted by an independent election body. This reflects the working of a vibrant democracy, which gives space to those who hold varying views.’
This was dishonest. The Freedom House report had two parts. The first, which carried a 40 per cent weightage, dealt with political rights. Here, India scored 34/40 (falling to 33/40 in 2023), including full marks for free and fair elections, the impartiality of the Election Commission, freedom to form political parties, and opportunities for the Opposition to increase its power. In this part, India did not get full marks on whether voting was unhampered by violence and unaffected by communal tension. This is hardly arguable. In fact, the government even got 3/4 for transparency, which was probably overgenerous.
The government’s response was therefore merely repeating what Freedom House had already said. Where India’s rating suffered was in the other 60 per cent, which covered civil liberties, also an essential component of freedom.
Here, India performed poorly (33/60). On issues such as freedom of expression, freedom of religion, academic freedom, freedom of assembly, the freedom of NGOs to operate (the report specifically cited the government’s attack on Amnesty International India), the rule of law, judicial independence and due process by the police, India’s ratings were poor. But the scores merely reflected reality.
The government appeared baffled by the results. It sought details from ministries about the parameters used by the Economist Intelligence Unit in downgrading India to a ‘flawed democracy’, even though the report itself clearly stated that the ‘primary cause was an erosion of civil liberties’ and the introduction of religion into citizenship laws.
The scores have dropped further in 2026, based on events in 2025. Political rights are now rated at 31/40 and civil liberties at 31/60, the lowest scores India has ever received. One suspects that events over the last few months will further damage the country’s score and international image. Why do I say that?
India was considered a democratic state because its institutions were intact and widely regarded as neutral, reasonably efficient and generally fair, much like those of most established democracies. That is what the Freedom House score reflects.
To the question, ‘Was the current head of government or other chief national authority elected through free and fair elections?’, Freedom House concluded that ‘executive elections and selection procedures are generally regarded as free and fair’ and awarded India 4/4.
On the question, ‘Were the current national legislative representatives elected through free and fair elections?’, India again scored 4/4, with the observation that ‘elections were considered generally free and fair, though some violations of campaign rules were reported’.
India scored 3/4 on the question, ‘Are the electoral laws and framework fair, and are they implemented impartially by the relevant election management bodies?’
And here is the critical paragraph, which says that the Opposition parties’ concerns intensified in 2025:
‘Concerns intensified in 2025 as the government expanded its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list, as carried out in Bihar, to 12 other states and territories. Among other things, the Opposition has alleged that the ECI has unfairly deleted large numbers of voters from the rolls and prevented eligible voters from registering by introducing excessive verification requirements. Political analysts and Opposition leaders have expressed concern that the SIR suppresses the Opposition vote and disenfranchises Muslim and other minority voters. Government officials have rejected allegations of voter roll manipulation. The SIR remained underway at year’s end.’
This was last year.
On the question, ‘Do people have the right to organise in different political parties or other competitive political groupings of their choice, and is the system free of undue obstacles to the rise and fall of these competing parties or groupings?’, India scored 3/4.
On the question, ‘Is there a realistic opportunity for the Opposition to increase its support or gain power through elections?’, India again scored 3/4.
None of these scores makes any sense now. They do not reflect our reality. The voter rolls have been mangled, the ECI has become an arm of the government and is hardly independent, and legislators are bought en masse. It no longer matters who loses elections because the House always wins, as they say about casinos.
The damage inflicted on civil liberties over the last few years was immediately apparent. The erosion of key institutions has taken slightly longer to register with observers, but it is now clear.
The jackboot of the state is a more honest symbol of the Indian state today than the ballot box.
