Summary
In an Indian Express column, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor argues that opposition parties should not boycott elections, even amid allegations that the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision has disenfranchised about 13 crore voters.
The Commission says 13.39 crore entries were only flagged under the Absent, Shifted, Dead or Duplicate category and calls the "vote chori" narrative misleading. This Opinion piece takes the position that contesting even a tilted election is the only way to keep democratic space alive.
It tests that position against the strongest objection, which is that participation lends legitimacy to a managed democracy. It does not decide whether the Commission or its critics are right about the rolls.
WHY IT MATTERS FOR UPSC & STATE PCS
Shashi Tharoor, a fourth-term Congress MP from Thiruvananthapuram, has written in the Indian Express against calls within the Opposition to boycott elections. The calls arise from controversy over the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
Under that exercise, 13.39 crore voters were flagged in the Absent, Shifted, Dead or Duplicate category. The Opposition alleges mass disenfranchisement and has demanded Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar's resignation.
The Commission says the entries were flagged rather than permanently deleted and rejects the allegations as a misleading narrative. Tharoor's argument draws on the Congress's own shift from boycotting the 1920 elections to contesting in 1937 and on the opposition's victory in Hungary's April 2026 election.
Standard News
Stay in the Arena
TAN's position: an opposition that boycotts elections gives up the only ground from which it can fight for anyone. Contesting even a tilted election is how democratic space is kept alive.
The number at the centre of the storm The Opposition alleges that around 13 crore voters have been disenfranchised through the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision.
The Commission's answer is that 13.39 crore entries were flagged as absent, shifted, dead or duplicate, not permanently deleted and that eligible voters can seek re-inclusion. It calls the "vote chori" charge a misleading narrative.
This piece does not decide that dispute. It asks a narrower question that Congress MP Shashi Tharoor raises in the Indian Express: should the response be to stop contesting elections altogether?
The reasoning **1.
A boycott does not switch off the state. Government continues, budgets pass and laws are made with or without an opposition. The only change is that nobody inside the system is left to object. An old French proverb, which Tharoor attributes to Talleyrand, makes the point: the absent are always wrong. 2.
The freedom-struggle precedent does not transfer.** The Congress boycotted the 1920 elections under the 1919 Act because the opponent was a foreign occupier without moral authority. Yet by 1937 the same party contested under the 1935 Act, despite a limited franchise and communal electorates, because staying out would have handed power to others.
Domestic rivals share a citizenship and a Constitution, so a strategy designed against an empire does not fit them. 3. Parties that stop contesting stop existing. Cadres disperse, local networks collapse and funding dries up.
A party that sits out one election cycle may find it has nothing left to bring back for the next. 4. The remedy for a flawed election needs someone who contested it. This week the Supreme Court set aside polls in 50 Punjab wards after a commission it appointed found that nominations had been obstructed.
That remedy existed because candidates had stood and challenged the result.
The strongest objection The serious objection is that participation legitimises a "managed democracy".
On this view, an opposition that contests a rigged game turns manipulation into apparent consent, because every loss is presented as the people's verdict.
Why the
position survives it The objection assumes that legitimacy flows mainly from the opposition's presence. In practice, governments facing a boycott tend to claim more legitimacy, pointing to a willing ballot and an opposition that ran away.
Legitimacy is withdrawn more effectively by contesting, documenting and challenging, because each polling agent is a witness and each claim filed is a record. The position also holds whichever side is right about the rolls.
If the Commission is right, a boycott protests a problem that does not exist. If the Opposition is right, a boycott abandons the very voters who were struck off at the moment they most need someone to help them re-enrol.
Quick Facts
Key numbers & takeaways — revise these first
-
Author: Shashi Tharoor, Congress MP, Thiruvananthapuram (fourth term) Figure in dispute: 13.39 crore voters flagged under the ASDD category (Absent, Shifted, Dead, Duplicate) during the Special Intensive Revision Opposition allegation: mass disenfranchisement; demand for the resignation of CEC Gyanesh Kumar Election Commission position: entries were flagged, not permanently deleted; eligible voters can seek re-inclusion; the "vote chori" claims are a misleading narrative Constitutional basis of the Election Commission: Article 324 1920: Congress boycotted the first elections under the Government of India Act, 1919 (Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms), during the Non-Cooperation Movement 1937: Congress contested the provincial elections under the Government of India Act, 1935, despite a limited franchise and communal electorates and formed ministries in several provinces Hungary, April 2026: the Tisza party led by Peter Magyar defeated Viktor Orban's Fidesz despite structural disadvantages French proverb "les absents ont toujours tort" (the absent are always wrong) is often attributed to the playwright Destouches
Connect the dots for your UPSC preparation.
Standard news covers the event. Log in to read our comprehensive analysis and uncover the hidden constitutional, structural, and ethical dimensions of this topic:
The managed-democracy objection built at full strength, including why the regime needs the opposition's participation more than the opposition needs the election.
The "both scenarios" test: why boycott fails whether the Election Commission's account of the 13.39 crore ASDD entries is right or the Opposition's is.
Venezuela's 2005 opposition boycott as the warning case, set against Hungary in April 2026 and the Congress's 1937 decision.
The one condition under which TAN concedes that the boycott case would win.
Included in this analysis
Join thousands of aspirants analyzing the news deeply.
Unlock Premium — Rs.699 AnnuallyDon't have an account? Sign up for free