N※N

Political Interference in Public Institutions: A Growing Threat to India's Democratic Integrity

65

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. wing-threat-to-india-s-democratic-integrity.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Monday, December 15th 2025 at 20:00 GMT by The Hans India

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-15 224 x 224 / 8105 Bytes

2025-12-15 245 x 206 / 4111 Bytes

2025-12-15 179 x 224 / 10231 Bytes

2025-12-15 179 x 224 / 7809 Bytes

Political Interference in Public Institutions: An Unacceptable Trend in India

The Hans India’s recent feature, “Political interference in institutions unacceptable,” brings to the fore a disconcerting trend that has been quietly eroding the integrity of India’s public institutions over the past decade. While the article’s headline is stark, the narrative woven throughout the piece is a nuanced exposition of how politics, whether overt or covert, has begun to seep into the corridors of academia, governance, and public service—thereby undermining the very pillars of democratic governance.

The Core Argument

At its heart, the article argues that institutional autonomy is not a luxury but a necessity for a functioning democracy. It traces the growing phenomenon of political interference to a series of high‑profile incidents—from the alleged meddling in appointments at premier research institutions like the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) to interference in the functioning of regulatory bodies such as the National Medical Commission (NMC) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

The piece begins by recounting the “IIT‑Kharagpur incident”, where a senior minister is said to have expressed “strong personal views” over the selection of the new director. According to the article, the selection panel was pressured to consider a candidate who was a close associate of the minister, a move that critics claimed “undermined the merit‑based selection process.” The incident was not an isolated blip but part of a broader pattern that the article outlines with references to multiple examples spanning sectors.

Expert Commentary

The author brings in voices from academia and civil society to underscore the dangers of political intrusion:

• Prof. N.K.S. Bhat, former Vice‑Chancellor of Jodhpur University, states, “When politics starts dictating who gets appointed or promoted, the very notion of a merit‑based system collapses.”
• Dr. A.K. Rao, an independent analyst, points to a 2022 report by the Institute of National Development, which found that “over 45 % of appointments in state‑run institutions over the last decade were influenced by political considerations.”

The article also quotes a senior parliamentary member who, while in the opposition, expressed concerns: “The integrity of our public institutions is paramount. Any sign of political interference is a direct threat to democratic norms and must be addressed with swift, structural reforms.”

Institutional Responses

The piece balances its critique with an examination of how the affected institutions have responded:

1. IITs and IIMs: The article references a 2023 statement by the IIT Board, which pledged to “strengthen the selection process by involving an independent panel of experts.” Yet, it also notes that the board’s transparency reports revealed that political considerations still play a role in the final decision.

2. NMC: After a parliamentary committee flagged irregularities in the appointment of its executive director, the NMC publicly committed to “restructuring its governance model” to preclude future interference. This included establishing an advisory committee comprising former civil servants and academicians.

3. CBI: The article references the CBI’s internal review following allegations that the Ministry of Home Affairs had tried to influence the investigation into a high‑profile political figure. The review concluded that “strict adherence to procedural safeguards is essential to prevent future lapses.”

The author stresses that while institutions have taken steps, the structural roots of interference remain unaddressed.

Parliamentary and Legal Context

A key portion of the article is dedicated to the parliamentary mechanisms that are designed to safeguard institutional autonomy. The author cites:

• The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance’s 2022 report that noted “increased central influence over the appointments in financial regulatory bodies.”
• The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore v. Union of India (2020), which reaffirmed the “independence of autonomous bodies from political meddling.”

Despite these safeguards, the article argues that enforcement has been lax. For instance, the Supreme Court’s own order that the Ministry of Finance should refrain from interfering in RBI’s appointments was largely ignored in the subsequent appointment of the RBI governor.

Calls for Reform

The article’s concluding section is a rallying cry for a comprehensive reform of governance structures across the board:

1. Creation of Independent Oversight Boards: The author recommends that every autonomous institution have a governing board free from direct ministerial appointment, with seats reserved for academicians and civil society representatives.

2. Transparent, Merit‑Based Selection Processes: The article points to the U.S. Federal Government’s 2021 “Open and Merit‑Based Hiring” guidelines as a model that could be adapted to the Indian context.

3. Mandatory Disclosure of Political Connections: By requiring all candidates for high‑level positions to disclose any political affiliations, institutions can reduce the risk of nepotism.

4. Strengthening Legal Frameworks: The author calls for amendments to the Public Service Commission Act and the National Institutional Grant Act to incorporate stricter penalties for parties found to have engaged in political interference.

The Wider Implications

While the article’s focus is on the institutional level, it extrapolates a broader narrative: that unchecked political interference erodes public trust, hampers policy implementation, and stifles innovation. By citing a 2021 study from the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), the author underscores that institutions perceived as politically neutral are more effective in delivering public goods.

Closing Reflections

The Hans India article ends on a sober note, reminding readers that the health of a democracy is reflected in the health of its institutions. The piece urges policymakers, civil society, and the public alike to recognize that political interference is not merely a bureaucratic inconvenience—it is a threat to the very principles of fairness, transparency, and accountability that underpin democratic governance. By acknowledging the problem and advocating for concrete reforms, the article sets a call to action that resonates beyond the immediate incidents it describes.

In summary, “Political interference in institutions unacceptable” is a compelling reminder that institutional autonomy is the backbone of democratic governance, and preserving it requires vigilance, transparency, and robust legal safeguards.