Can’t have sabka vishwas with target guns and lathis
Editorial argues that democratic legitimacy weakens when the state uses intimidation and disproportionate force in public order situations.
- The Indian Express editorial argues that heavy-handed policing and indiscriminate force deepen alienation between citizens and the state.
- The Indian Express editorial argues that democratic governments should treat dissent as a constitutional reality and manage it with fairness and discipline.
The Indian Express editorial argues that public order policing must be restrained, proportionate, and accountable. It says the state cannot build public trust through intimidation, because excessive force can deepen alienation and weaken the legitimacy of government action.
The Indian Express editorial’s central claim is that dissent is a constitutional reality, not an enemy to be crushed. It treats democratic restraint as a core requirement of governance, especially when law-and-order agencies respond to protests, disorder, or other public disturbances.
The Indian Express editorial links three ideas: constitutional democracy, proportional policing, and state legitimacy. Its position is that coercive policing may restore immediate control, but it damages the long-term relationship between citizens and the state.
UPSC can frame public order policing as a governance and ethics question on how the state should balance law-and-order enforcement with constitutional rights, proportionality, accountability, and public trust.
Related dispatches
