The Indian government's recent choice to exclude the Leaders of the Opposition from a high-profile state banquet has ignited a debate on democratic decorum and institutional respect. The incident occurred during the official visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin, when invitations to the state dinner hosted at Rashtrapati Bhavan were not extended to Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge, the Leaders of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, respectively.
A Breach of Constitutional Decorum
This omission stands in stark contrast to the spirit displayed just weeks earlier on Constitution Day, November 26, 2025. On that day, the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, Lok Sabha Speaker, and Opposition leaders from both Houses stood united to read the Preamble, symbolizing a shared commitment to the Constitution. The state dinner snub undermines that powerful symbolism. While the ruling BJP has correctly noted that Rahul Gandhi has previously skipped state events like some Independence Day celebrations and swearing-in ceremonies, this does not justify excluding the constitutional office he holds. An invitation to such a national event is not a personal endorsement but a recognition of the office and the millions of citizens represented by the Opposition.
The Significance of the High Table
The issue transcends individuals. A government in its 12th consecutive year in power should possess the institutional confidence to include voices from across the political spectrum at events of national importance. The presence of diverse leaders from parties like the Trinamool Congress, DMK, Samajwadi Party, RJD, and AAP is not a mere courtesy. It is a robust statement of India's democratic maturity. The government itself has upheld this principle in the past, such as by sending multi-party delegations abroad after Operation Sindoor to present a united front on cross-border terrorism.
A Missed Opportunity for Democratic Symbolism
Whether President Putin engages with opposition figures in his own country or elsewhere is irrelevant. An invitation from India's highest constitutional authority would have powerfully affirmed that in Indian democracy, even those out of power have a seat at the highest table. By denying this basic symbolism, the government weakened its own standing and projected an image of being needlessly petty. The act made the government appear small, overshadowing the diplomatic occasion with domestic political discord.
Ultimately, in a vibrant and often noisy democracy like India, certain decencies must be preserved. Political rivals are not enemies, and the nation's idea is larger than any single party. Failing to honor constitutional offices during moments of international diplomacy diminishes the very democratic strength India seeks to project on the global stage.
