There is something amusing, if not downright contradictory, about an Opposition that never tires of invoking the Constitution but appears increasingly reluctant to use the very institution through which its democratic authority is exercised — Parliament. The Congress-led INDIA bloc seems to have discovered a curious new constitutional doctrine: when Parliament does not deliver the desired political spectacle, take the battle to the streets. Samvidhan when convenient, Sadak when frustrated!
In my view, there is something fundamentally contradictory about an Opposition that invokes the Constitution at every opportunity but appears reluctant to use the very institution through which its democratic authority is exercised. Democracy cannot mean accepting institutions only when they deliver outcomes favourable to one’s political interests. The Constitution is not a political prop to be displayed at rallies and then conveniently forgotten when Parliament offers an opportunity for debate.
The latest confrontation over Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar is a case in point. If the Congress and its allies genuinely believe that the CEC has committed serious misconduct, acted in a partisan manner or compromised the independence of the Election Commission, they have every right to demand accountability. But allegations, however loudly repeated, do not become established facts through street demonstrations, slogans or political theatrics. Evidence must lead action; allegations must not be allowed to masquerade as verdicts.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s challenge to Rahul Gandhi and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav to debate the issue in a special session of Parliament is, therefore, an opportunity the Opposition should not casually dismiss. The government has indicated its readiness for a discussion. Why not accept the challenge? If the INDIA bloc believes it has the numbers, arguments and evidence, Parliament offers the most appropriate arena to demonstrate all three.
In my view, Amit Shah’s offer of a special parliamentary session should be treated as a political opportunity rather than dismissed as another government challenge. If the Congress is confident of its allegations, why not persuade even NDA allies, build the necessary numbers, and pursue the constitutional process? That would be a far more convincing demonstration of democratic strength.
After all, the Modi government does not enjoy the luxury of an independent majority in the present Lok Sabha. Unlike in 2014 and 2019, the BJP fell short of a majority on its own in 2024 and depends on its NDA partners to remain in power. The Congress, with its 99 MPs elected in 2024, and its regional allies have every opportunity to persuade those partners to reconsider their political support.
Hasn’t the Opposition already demonstrated its ability to unite and defeat the government’s Constitution Amendment Bill linked to delimitation in April? That was parliamentary politics at work, not street theatre. The government suffered a significant legislative setback, and democracy did not collapse. Why not attempt the same political arithmetic over the Election Commission?
If the Congress is convinced that the CEC deserves removal, let it mobilise every possible parliamentary ally, including those within the NDA, and pursue the constitutional procedure. Article 324(5), read with Article 124(4), provides for the CEC’s removal on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The process demands an exacting parliamentary majority in both Houses. It is deliberately difficult because the independence of the Election Commission must be protected from the changing moods of political power.
The Opposition has already attempted to initiate removal proceedings, but its notices were rejected by the presiding officers of both Houses. It can challenge those decisions, pursue lawful remedies and present fresh grounds where justified. What it cannot reasonably expect is that political declarations on the streets should carry the authority of a constitutional decision. A mock Parliament cannot substitute for Parliament, however impressive the microphones and placards.
More intriguing is the apparent political impatience of the Congress as Uttar Pradesh approaches another Assembly election in 2027. Does it believe that constant confrontation, provocative slogans and demonstrations will automatically translate into electoral support? The Modi government, despite the INDIA bloc’s repeated provocations, has continued to engage through parliamentary processes rather than allow street protests to dictate its political course. Its own confidence, too, will ultimately be tested at the ballot box.
Nor should political protests become a recurring source of inconvenience for ordinary citizens, traders and festival-goers. When demonstrations and political campaigns coincide with major festivals such as Dussehra and Diwali, organisers must consider the wider public interest. The country has an economy to run, businesses to sustain and a society that deserves peace. Democracy does not grant any political organisation an unlimited licence to hold ordinary life hostage.
As a responsible media platform, Orangenews9 finds no vicarious pleasure in prolonged street confrontations or the spectacle of partisan supporters claiming to speak for an entire nation. Political dissent is legitimate; institutional disruption is not its necessary companion. The electorate sends representatives to Parliament to debate, question, challenge and legislate — not to turn every disagreement into a street confrontation.
In my view, the Congress-led Opposition is running the risk of confusing street mobilisation with political relevance. The people have elected their representatives to Parliament to debate, question and challenge the government, not to keep the country perpetually agitated. Ultimately, the electorate, not the loudest protest, will decide who deserves its mandate.
The Congress must understand that its confrontational politics could ultimately damage not merely its own prospects but those of its regional INDIA bloc partners. The electorate is watching, assessing and remembering. Uttar Pradesh and other Assembly elections before the 2029 Lok Sabha contest will provide ample opportunity for voters to deliver their verdict.
The irony is difficult to miss. A party that frequently accuses the ruling establishment of undermining the Constitution is now being offered an opportunity to demonstrate its faith in that very Constitution. Will it choose Samvidhan or Sadak?
There is a difference between being a determined Opposition and becoming a perpetual protest organisation. The former strengthens democracy; the latter risks making itself irrelevant. And if the Congress continues to mistake street noise for public mandate, its much-advertised battle to prevent a Congress-mukt Bharat could end up accelerating precisely that political possibility. Its regional allies, too, may discover that an alliance built on agitation but short on constructive politics has a limited shelf life.
In a democracy, the final word belongs neither to the ruling party nor to the Opposition, but to the people. Parliament is where their elected representatives must make their case. The streets are no substitute for that responsibility.
