(Evaluation) Prime Minister Narendra Modi has cultivated a formidable world picture as a visionary chief of the “world’s largest democracy.”
Internationally, he’s usually acquired with nice fanfare – from internet hosting the G20 summit in 2023 to being courted by Western powers anticipating India’s partnership.
Modi’s authorities tasks India as a rising financial powerhouse and a champion of the World South. This worldwide stature, nevertheless, contrasts sharply with the home actuality.
At house, impartial observers and rights organizations level to a troubling erosion of democratic norms and freedoms, creating a spot between Modi’s world branding and India’s inner scenario.
On the world stage, Modi has largely been embraced by different leaders – usually because of geostrategic and financial pursuits.
For example, regardless of considerations about India’s democratic backsliding, america honored Modi with a state go to in 2023, highlighting India’s significance as a counterweight to China.
Many overseas governments downplay India’s inner points for the sake of strategic ties. But world civil society and media haven’t missed India’s democratic decline.
Influential indices have downgraded India’s democratic credentials lately: Freedom Home infamously demoted India from “Free” to “Partly Free” in 2021, and the V-Dem Institute now classifies India as an “electoral autocracy”.
These assessments underscore that whereas Modi advertises India as a thriving democracy overseas, home developments inform a extra difficult story of diminishing freedoms and institutional checks.
Critics argue that Modi’s authorities has centered on sharpening its worldwide picture even because it tightens management at house.
The administration has even deliberate to introduce its personal “democracy index” – by a government-aligned suppose tank – to counter unfavorable evaluations by Western businesses.
This means a eager consciousness in New Delhi of worldwide perceptions, and a want to bridge the credibility hole between how India is seen overseas versus the realities on the bottom.
In sum, Modi’s world picture as a daring, modernizing statesman is at odds with home realities characterised by mounting considerations over press freedom, institutional autonomy, and minority rights.
The next sections look at these home challenges intimately, highlighting the distinction between worldwide accolades and inner anxieties.
Press Freedom and Censorship
One of the vital pronounced areas of concern in 2024–25 has been the shrinking house for press freedom in India.
Beneath Modi’s tenure, journalists and media shops have confronted rising censorship, authorized strain, and intimidation.
India’s rating on the World Press Freedom Index has plummeted – in 2024 the nation was ranked 159th out of 180 nations, reflecting a quickly deteriorating setting for journalists.
Reporters With out Borders describes India’s media as being in an “unofficial state of emergency” since Modi took workplace in 2014.
This decline is attributed to a troubling pattern of governmental suppression, together with new legal guidelines and aggressive actions that curb impartial reporting.
A number of legislative measures lately have given the federal government expansive powers to management media content material and on-line discourse.
Notably, the Telecom Act of 2023, a proposed Broadcasting Regulation Invoice, and the Digital Private Knowledge Safety Act of 2023 all include provisions enabling authorities to censor information and silence critics within the identify of regulation.
These legal guidelines strengthen the state’s hand in monitoring and eradicating content material, elevating fears of legalized censorship. Social media platforms and overseas media have additionally come beneath strain.
In early 2024, for instance, the federal government ordered Twitter (now X) to dam hundreds of accounts – together with journalists’ and even worldwide shops’ handles – for posting content material deemed important of the authorities.
Such directives exemplify how on-line expression is being curtailed alongside conventional media.
The impression on journalists has been chilling. Those that critique the federal government often face harassment campaigns, prison circumstances, and even arrest.
In line with Reporters With out Borders, as of mid-2024 a minimum of 9 journalists had been behind bars in India, usually on doubtful fees that critics say are geared toward stifling dissent.
Excessive-profile examples embody tax raids or investigations in opposition to media homes recognized for important reporting.
In 2023, places of work of the BBC in India had been raided by tax authorities shortly after the BBC aired a documentary scrutinizing Modi’s file – a transfer extensively seen as retaliatory censorship by proxy.
Extra alarmingly, journalists engaged on delicate subjects typically encounter violence.
In a single case, a contract reporter investigating native corruption was discovered murdered in early 2025, underscoring the very actual risks confronted by these pursuing hard-hitting tales.
Press freedom screens observe that journalists in battle areas like Kashmir are particularly weak, usually subjected to police harassment and extended detentions with out trial for his or her reporting.
Worldwide watchdogs now categorize India’s media setting as solely “partly free,” citing rising media suppression.
The authorities, for its half, routinely dismisses these critiques, usually accusing the press of anti-national bias or claiming world indices are biased.
The result’s an environment during which many media shops self-censor to keep away from official wrath, and important voices are muzzled both by direct motion or by a local weather of concern.
India’s constitutionally assured freedom of expression is more and more beneath pressure, as censorship – each overt and covert – chips away at one among democracy’s pillars.
Erosion of Democratic Establishments
Alongside media clampdowns, India has witnessed a gradual erosion of its democratic establishments and checks and balances throughout 2024–25.
Modi’s critics argue that key establishments meant to supply oversight or stay politically impartial have been steadily undermined or delivered to heel by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Social gathering (BJP).
This consists of the forms of legislation enforcement and investigative businesses, impartial constitutional our bodies, and even the judiciary.
A central concern is the weaponization of presidency businesses in opposition to opposition leaders and dissenters.
Within the run-up to the 2024 normal election, there have been a number of situations suggesting misuse of investigative powers for political ends.
For instance, in March 2024, authorities arrested a outstanding opposition determine (the Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi) on corruption allegations and, on the exact same day, froze the financial institution accounts of the principle nationwide opposition social gathering.
These simultaneous actions – coming at a politically delicate time – amplified fears that establishments just like the police, Enforcement Directorate, and Central Bureau of Investigation are getting used to focus on the ruling social gathering’s rivals.
Earlier, in 2023, two opposition-led state governments noticed their chief ministers arrested on graft fees, strikes that, whereas ostensibly law-enforcement, had been extensively perceived as politically motivated.
Such patterns have led observers to warn of “electoral backsliding,” the place the ruling social gathering exploits state equipment to tilt the taking part in discipline in its favor. Unbiased oversight our bodies have additionally seen their autonomy come beneath menace.
In late 2023, Parliament handed a brand new legislation overhauling the appointment course of for Election Commissioners – a transfer that critics say considerably will increase government affect over the Election Fee of India.
The Chief Justice of India, who was beforehand a part of the choice committee for the Chief Election Commissioner, was faraway from that function, leaving the Prime Minister and a cupboard minister (alongside the opposition chief) to handpick election officers.
Opposition MPs decried this modification, arguing it might pave the best way for pliant election commissioners and undermine the impartiality of the physique that oversees India’s polls. Equally, different watchdog establishments have been accused of missing independence.
The Nationwide Human Rights Fee and commissions for minorities, ladies, or different marginalized teams have largely been ineffective in checking abuses, with reviews that these our bodies have been filled with authorities loyalists or in any other case rendered toothless.
This has allowed points like human rights violations or minority safety to go unaddressed by the very establishments meant to uphold constitutional ensures.
The judiciary’s independence has confronted pressures as properly, elevating questions concerning the robustness of the rule of legislation.
Beneath Modi, the federal government has often clashed with the Supreme Court docket over judicial appointments and choices.
The administration stalled or rejected some suggestions of the judicial collegium (the panel of senior judges that selects judges), an uncommon breach of conference that senior justices publicly protested as an try at “political seize” of the courts.
Authorized consultants observe that since 2014, the manager has sought a better say in appointing judges, which many concern may compromise the judiciary’s capacity to behave as a verify on authorities energy.
Whereas the Supreme Court docket has at instances pushed again – as an illustration, hanging down a proposed governmental appointment fee earlier in Modi’s tenure – the continuing tussle has created an impression that judicial autonomy is step by step being eroded.
Moreover, courts have been uneven in defending civil liberties: in some circumstances they’ve stood up without spending a dime speech or minority rights, however in others they’ve appeared deferential to the federal government (for instance, accepting extended detentions of activists beneath harsh anti-terror legal guidelines).
This inconsistency fuels the notion that institutional checks and balances are weakening. In abstract, a number of pillars of India’s democracy – free elections, impartial courts, autonomous regulators – have proven indicators of pressure.
The ruling social gathering’s dominance in Parliament (even after dropping some floor in 2024) and its expansive use of government energy have raised the danger of a single-party hegemonic system.
The BJP nonetheless governs inside a formally democratic framework, however the erosion of institutional safeguards beneath Modi’s management has led analysts to warn that Indian democracy is being hollowed out from inside.
Social Unrest and Polarization
Social cohesion in India has frayed notably lately, with rising unrest and deepening polarization alongside non secular and communal strains.
Modi’s tenure has coincided with a surge in Hindu nationalist rhetoric and insurance policies that critics say have marginalized minorities, particularly India’s Muslim inhabitants.
The interval 2024–2025 noticed these tensions manifest in bouts of violence, discriminatory legal guidelines coming into impact, and an environment of mutual mistrust between communities.
A stark indicator of rising polarization is the upswing in communal violence. In line with a report by the Centre for Examine of Society and Secularism, 2024 witnessed a dramatic 84% improve in communal riots in comparison with the earlier yr.
There have been 59 recorded riots in 2024, up from 32 in 2023, and considerably, 49 of these occurred in states ruled by Modi’s BJP (alone or in coalition).
The majority of victims in these clashes have been Muslims, underscoring the notion that minority communities are bearing the brunt of sectarian strife.
The report famous that many of those riots had been intentionally incited throughout non secular occasions – for instance, processions and festivals had been exploited to impress conflicts by aggressive posturing and hate slogans.
Analysts attribute the spike in violence partly to the polarizing local weather of the 2024 elections, during which hardline rhetoric was used to mobilize voters, and to an “ecosystem of impunity” fostered by authorities sympathetic to Hindu nationalist teams.
In BJP-ruled states, slightly than vigorously prosecuting perpetrators of communal violence, officers have usually taken punitive actions in opposition to the minority victims.
An notorious instance being the usage of bulldozers to demolish properties in Muslim neighborhoods as abstract “collective punishment” after disturbances.
Such responses have emboldened extremist components and signaled that assaults on minorities might go unpunished and even be tacitly condoned.
Past organized riots, vigilante violence and hate crimes have additional infected social divisions.
Mob lynchings, a scourge that first drew consideration a couple of years into Modi’s rule, continued into 2024.
No less than 13 situations of mob lynching had been reported that yr, leading to 11 deaths – 9 of them Muslims.
Many of those lynchings had been pushed by Hindu extremist cow-protection teams or by rumors focusing on interfaith {couples} (so-called “love jihad” accusations).
The persistence of such brutality, usually with sluggish or insufficient response from legislation enforcement, has contributed to an environment of concern amongst minorities.
Non secular minorities, significantly Muslims, really feel more and more weak and alienated in what they understand as a Hindu-majoritarian state.
This sense of alienation has been strengthened by authorities insurance policies just like the Citizenship Modification Act (CAA), which in 2024 was put in force after years of delay.
The Citizenship Modification Act (CAA) presents a fast-track to Indian citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from neighboring nations, whereas explicitly excluding Muslims from this provision.
Critics argue that this exclusion introduces a spiritual check for citizenship for the primary time in impartial India, sparking widespread debate and controversy.
The legislation, coupled with discuss of a nationwide citizen registry, sparked widespread protests again in 2019–20 and stays a logo of the federal government’s Hindu nationalist agenda that many consider undermines India’s secular foundations.
Political rhetoric from the ruling social gathering has additionally sharpened communal divides. BJP leaders and marketing campaign messaging often invoke non secular identification and nationalism in polarizing methods.
Throughout state elections in late 2024, as an illustration, BJP campaigns overtly portrayed Muslims as “infiltrators” threatening the Hindu neighborhood, urging Hindu voters to unite in opposition to this supposed enemy.
This sort of messaging, which paints minorities as disloyal or harmful, additional entrenches an “us versus them” mindset. It normalizes prejudice and might incite followers to behave on bigotry.
Human Rights Watch reported that in lots of elements of India, non secular minorities and Dalits confronted elevated harassment and violence in 2023, and that police in BJP-led states usually failed to guard these weak teams – or worse, punished them after they sought justice.
A outstanding instance was the ethnic violence in Manipur (a northeastern state) in 2023, the place clashes between communities led to a whole bunch of deaths and big displacement.
Critics charged that the central and state governments had been sluggish to intervene, seemingly as a result of the victims had been largely from Christian and tribal minority teams.
The Manipur battle, although ethnic in nature, underscored how beneath Modi’s governance social conflicts are both politicized or met with indifference if they don’t match the bulk narrative.
In abstract, India’s social material within the Modi period has grow to be more and more frayed. Majoritarian politics and polarization have led to extra frequent and extra violent sectarian confrontations, threatening the nation’s long-standing ethos of variety and pluralism.
The unrest and alienation brewing in society pose a severe problem: they’re each a product of, and an extra catalyst for, the democratic backsliding mentioned earlier.
A democracy divided in opposition to itself – the place giant segments of the inhabitants really feel disenfranchised or demonized – is inherently in danger.
Modi’s India faces the duty of therapeutic these divides, whilst the federal government’s personal actions and rhetoric usually appear to worsen them.
Conclusion: Is Modi Changing into Authoritarian?
The developments from 2024 by 2025 have led many observers to query whether or not Narendra Modi is steering India in an authoritarian route.
Whereas India stays a constitutional democracy with common elections, the patterns of governance beneath Modi bear unmistakable authoritarian overtones.
Key options of an intolerant or authoritarian regime – comparable to centralization of energy, intolerance of dissent, undermining of impartial establishments, and the promotion of a single hegemonic ideology – have all grow to be more and more evident in India’s polity.
Modi’s administration has concentrated energy within the government, with the Prime Minister’s Workplace and loyalists wielding outsized affect over coverage and politics.
Mechanisms that usually maintain a frontrunner accountable or present pluralism – a free press, a strong opposition, autonomous courts and businesses – have been systematically weakened or intimidated.
The press is much less free than it was a decade in the past, opposition figures discover themselves embroiled in authorized troubles that critics deem politically motivated, and establishments starting from the Election Fee to rights commissions are seen as more and more subservient to the ruling social gathering.
Mixed with the BJP’s promotion of Hindu majoritarian nationalism (usually on the expense of minority rights), these traits mirror a democratic backsliding that’s attribute of “electoral authoritarianism.”
In different phrases, the types of democracy (elections, parliament, courts) largely stay, however their substance is eroding by partisan seize and the constriction of civil liberties.
It is very important observe that Modi’s governance nonetheless operates inside an electoral framework – he and his social gathering proceed to hunt mandates from the general public, and in 2024 the voters did cut back the BJP’s majority, exhibiting that electoral competitors persists.
India has not abolished opposition events or cancelled elections, as a full-fledged dictatorship would.
Nonetheless, the taking part in discipline of these elections and the civic house during which democracy thrives have undeniably been skewed in Modi’s favor throughout his rule.
This is the reason impartial watchdogs now rank India decrease on democratic indices regardless of its continued elections.
The route of change is what worries analysts: annually of Modi’s tenure has seen incremental strikes that consolidate government management and marginalize opposing voices.
This trajectory mirrors the early phases of authoritarianism noticed in different nations.
Whether or not Modi is “turning into authoritarian” will be answered by observing these cumulative actions and their intent.
The proof suggests a frontrunner steadily accruing energy and subverting norms of accountability.
Many commentators draw parallels to Indira Gandhi’s emergency rule within the Seventies – when democratic rights had been suspended – albeit executed in a slower, extra refined method.
Beneath Modi, there was no formal suspension of the structure; as an alternative, legal guidelines are reinterpreted, establishments repurposed, and dissent delegitimized to realize the same dominance by the ruling regime.
If present traits proceed unchecked, India dangers drifting into what political scientists name a “aggressive authoritarian” state – a system that’s formally democratic however primarily authoritarian in observe.
In conclusion, Narendra Modi’s tenure from 2024 to 2025 reveals clear authoritarian tendencies.
The clampdown on press freedom, the weakening of institutional checks, and the fomenting of social divisions to entrench energy all level towards a mannequin of governance that’s starkly at odds with liberal democratic beliefs.
Modi himself, buoyed by a robust private mandate and a fractured opposition, has proven little inclination to mood these traits. Barring a course correction, India’s democracy faces a important check of resilience.
The approaching years will decide whether or not the nation’s establishments and civil society can stand up to and counter the authoritarian drift – or whether or not Modi’s management will rework the world’s largest democracy into one thing significantly much less free than it as soon as was.
