There are occasions when Parliament must rise above partisan politics. Protecting the future of millions of students is undoubtedly one of them. Yet, the Congress-led Opposition has chosen to paralyse Parliament for the sixth consecutive day, preventing discussion on one of the most consequential reforms aimed at tackling the menace of question paper leaks. That raises an uncomfortable question: what exactly is the Opposition afraid of?
The proposed Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 is not a retrospective law. It does not reopen old cases, rewrite history or seek to punish anyone for offences committed before its enactment. The Constitution itself prohibits retrospective application of harsher criminal penalties. Every first-year law student knows that penal statutes imposing enhanced punishments operate prospectively unless expressly provided otherwise, which this legislation does not.
If that is the legal position, why the panic? Why the disruption? Why deny Parliament the opportunity to debate the Bill clause by clause?
One may understand the ideological position of the DMK, which has consistently opposed NEET and sought its abolition, even if many disagree with that stand. But what explains the Congress’ blanket opposition to a law that seeks only to deter organised examination fraud? If the legislation merely strengthens future safeguards against paper leaks, what principle is being violated?
The answer perhaps lies elsewhere. Tougher laws mean greater accountability. States that fail to secure examination systems could face uncomfortable scrutiny. Governments unable or unwilling to dismantle paper leak syndicates may find themselves under public pressure. Is that what is making some Opposition parties nervous?
The proposed amendments substantially increase punishment for those involved in organised examination fraud, with imprisonment extending up to ten years and fines reaching ₹10 crore. Such stringent penalties are not directed against innocent students. They target criminal networks, corrupt officials, middlemen, organised rackets and commercial entities that have repeatedly stolen opportunities from deserving candidates.
Every leaked question paper is far more than a criminal offence. It is the theft of dreams.
Each leak destroys years of hard work put in by lakhs of honest students. Families make enormous sacrifices, spending their savings on coaching, accommodation and study materials. When examinations are compromised, merit becomes the casualty while criminals profit. It is not merely an administrative failure; it is an assault on the very principle of equal opportunity.
India conducts hundreds of recruitment and entrance examinations every year involving millions of aspirants seeking admission into educational institutions or government employment. Even a single leak undermines public confidence in the entire examination ecosystem.
The Modi government’s approach appears to be two-fold. First, impose stringent punishment on those who orchestrate examination fraud. Second, modernise the examination process through technology, better surveillance, administrative reforms and institutional safeguards. The reported appointment of a high-level task force under noted technologist Nandan Nilekani reflects an intent to address systemic vulnerabilities rather than merely react after scandals erupt.
Whether every provision in the Bill is perfect is beside the point. Parliament exists precisely to examine legislation. If the Opposition believes certain clauses require modification, let it place constructive amendments on the table. If procedural safeguards need strengthening, let them be debated. If implementation mechanisms need improvement, let better alternatives be suggested.
That is how parliamentary democracy functions.
Instead, Parliament is being reduced to a theatre of slogans where disruption has become a substitute for debate. Blocking discussion without even allowing the House to deliberate serves neither democracy nor the students whose interests every political party claims to champion.
The Congress-led Opposition cannot simultaneously profess concern for students and obstruct legislation intended to make question paper leaks riskier and more difficult. Opposition for the sake of opposition is not statesmanship. It is political theatre at the expense of young Indians whose futures depend on fair and credible examinations.
If the Bill has flaws, improve it. If it requires stronger safeguards, propose them. If there are constitutional concerns, articulate them.
But do not stall Parliament.
The nation expects legislators to legislate—not litigate political battles on the floor of the House while millions of students wait for a fair examination system. On an issue where the victims are ordinary aspirants and the beneficiaries are organised cheating syndicates, Parliament should be speaking in one voice.
The question before the Opposition is simple: Will it stand with honest students or continue shielding politics behind parliamentary disruption?
They have nothing constructive to do. That is why they are in opposition. If one goes back to 1990s, BJP could be seen as a more responsible opposition than congress and other parties now.
People have become immune to bills, acts and laws because thay hardly get to see fair, impartial and strict implementation of rules. ED and CBI raids are selective, media is selective and so is judiciary and the executive. It is this system that robbed people of having trust on any of the pillars of democracy.
Indian politics is going through a very peculiar phase with the “fading – away” of opposition party – right from its ideology to its very presence in the Parliament while some very noted senior members of the opposition becoming totally blind, mute and deaf – yielding to a “presumed” who has zero knowledge of the socio-economic and political situations through which the country is sailing and the seriousness with which they have to be addressed as positive team supporting the party in Power for a more constructive and rapid development. But, unfortunately the opposition lost its sanctity and also credibility. When the cover page is “torn” the contents lose their value.