New Delhi: Indian lawyers, policymakers, civil servants, scientists, and academicians working with Harvard University have issued a statement expressing deep concern over what they call a “concerted campaign” against India’s constitutional bodies. The signatories, identifying themselves as “concerned citizens from the world’s oldest and largest democracy, India”, said the Constitution must take precedence over political expediency.
The statement comes days after protests in Delhi against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter rolls were met with a heavy police presence, mass detentions, and allegations of police brutality and unlawful holding of peaceful protesters. The protests, organised by the Coakroach Janta Party (CJP) and student groups, demand the resignation of the CEC and the rollback of SIR. Opposition parties have since joined the protests.
A separate group of about 100 Harvard alumni, students, faculty, and staff had previously condemned Delhi Police actions during protests on 10 October. They alleged “police brutality, unlawful detention, and violations of constitutional rights of all peaceful protestors” and called for accountability under the rule of law.
The new statement condemns the statement previously issued under the name of Harvard.
“We, concerned citizens from the world’s oldest and largest democracy, India, write with a deep sense of responsibility,” the statement reads. “We are deeply concerned by the negative public discourse and concerted campaign against India’s constitutional institutions, including the Election Commission of India, the Supreme Court, the office of the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, and Parliament.”
They added that the use of Harvard University’s name “to lend credibility to a political campaign without appropriate authorisation” was troubling.
The language describing India as under “siege” and constitutional authorities as “thieves” or “compromised”, the statement said, “raises serious concerns about the intent to undermine public trust in democratic institutions.”
‘A common conviction’
While acknowledging that law-enforcement actions to maintain public order “deserve fair scrutiny,” the signatories insisted that “sweeping accusations and abusive rhetoric cannot substitute for evidence, due process or institutional accountability.”
The statement urged that the dignity of public servants and the offices, as well as the Constitution, must be respected.
“Our commitment must remain to the Constitution, not convenience; to justice, not selective outrage; and to democratic institutions, not the politics of accusation,” it said.
An accompanying message noted that the group shares “a common conviction: The Constitution must prevail over political expediency, due process over accusations, and institutional integrity over partisan interests.”
It framed the response as a rejection of “self-righteous individuals” allegedly maligning India’s democracy for external acclaim while affirming “Trust and Confidence in Indian Institutions”.
(Edited by Prasanna Bachchhav)
Also read: Hillary Clinton’s next act? A podcast about a world in flux
You see the hypocrisy on both sides of the Atlantic: a network of activists and domestic agitators crying about democracy while using terms like ‘compromised’ and ‘thieves’ to bully the Election Commission and courts whenever decisions don’t fit their political roadmap. They demand the rule of law only when it serves them, masking institutional vandalism as activism.