Parliament Reopens Amid Growing Concerns Over Democratic Debate
As India's Parliament prepares to reopen its doors in New Delhi, serious questions emerge about the health of legislative debate across the country's democratic institutions. The crisis affecting legislatures is most visible in Parliament, but extends to state assemblies where substantive law-making and deliberation face unprecedented challenges.
Bihar's Dubious Record: Lowest Assembly Performance in History
Recent data from PRS Legislative Research reveals alarming trends in Bihar's legislative functioning. Between November 2020 and July 2025, the 17th Bihar assembly met for only 146 days - the lowest of all its five-year terms. To put this in perspective, the second assembly had sat for 434 days, nearly three times longer.
The assembly's performance shows deeper issues: it met for an average of just 29 days per year, with each sitting lasting approximately three hours. This falls significantly below the five-hour average for state legislatures recorded in 2024. Most concerning, every one of the 78 bills passed during this period was approved on the day of introduction, with none referred to committees for detailed review or scrutiny.
Despite these troubling statistics, the poorly functioning assembly failed to become a significant election issue during Bihar's recent campaign. Neither opposition parties nor their high commands deemed it worthy of serious discussion, highlighting how party directives and obedience have superseded meaningful debate.
High Command Culture: The Invisible Strings of Power
The erosion of deliberative democracy extends beyond state assemblies to political parties themselves. A recent photograph from Karnataka illustrates this trend perfectly. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and Deputy CM DK Shivakumar appeared together in what observers described as a "command performance" orchestrated by the Congress high command.
Reports indicate the meeting was held at the high command's insistence, and any decisions regarding leadership changes in Karnataka would similarly come from Delhi. This transparent display of unity between leaders known to be competing for power only emphasizes the concentration of decision-making at the national level.
The phenomenon isn't limited to opposition parties. The BJP high command, buoyed by recent electoral victories in Maharashtra, Haryana, Delhi, and Bihar, has become increasingly visible in its power concentration. The party has operated without a formal president since January 2024, when the previous president's term ended. In Parliament, treasury benches frequently erupt in chants of "Modi Modi," while BJP ministers and MPs rarely deliver speeches without paying homage to the Prime Minister.
Constitutional Day Snapshot: The Missing Middle Ground
Another telling image emerged from Parliament's Central Hall on Constitution Day. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi stood together reading the Preamble alongside other government and opposition leaders. The rarity of this shared frame underscores the deeper political divide.
The two leaders are not known to maintain communication, with Modi frequently labeling Rahul Gandhi's party as the "Muslim League-y Maowadi Congress," while Gandhi accuses Modi of "vote chori" or election theft. This breakdown of dialogue between the country's top political figures has significant consequences for democratic discourse.
The absence of middle ground transforms every political encounter into a zero-sum game, where debate gives way to relentless point-scoring. The anti-defection law further complicates matters by binding MPs to their high command's directives, limiting independent thought and discussion.
The Larger Pattern: Democratic Institutions Under Strain
When viewed together, these snapshots from Bihar, Karnataka, and Parliament reveal a disturbing pattern. Deliberative spaces that were always fragile in Indian democracy are now shrinking rapidly amid increasing polarization and institutional weakening.
State assemblies across India increasingly function as echo chambers of executive authority rather than vibrant forums for discussion. This trend connects directly to the lack of internal deliberation within political parties, where high command culture stifles debate possibilities.
Following the Bihar election setback, for instance, the Congress high command directed post-mortem discussions toward blaming the Election Commission and the NDA's cash transfer scheme rather than examining internal failures. This approach allowed the party to avoid uncomfortable questions about why it failed to present voters with compelling ideas that could transcend caste and community divisions.
The chilling effect extends throughout the political system. When parties cannot foster genuine debate within their own organizations, they become unlikely champions for deliberative freedom in broader institutional spaces. The conspicuous breakdown at the highest levels of leadership creates ripple effects that diminish civil debate throughout the polity.
As Parliament resumes sessions, the fundamental question remains: will India's premier legislative institution facilitate genuine debate, or will it continue reflecting the broader erosion of deliberative democracy affecting institutions nationwide?
