Opposition Vice Presidential candidate B. Sudershan Reddy on Saturday (August 23, 2025) said there was a “deficit in democracy” in the country and the Constitution was “under challenge” as he pledged to defend and protect it.
In a wide-ranging exclusive interview to PTI, Justice (Retd) Reddy dwelt on a range of issues — from how his candidature came about, the debate on the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the Preamble to the Constitution, to Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s accusation that he supported Maoism.
He said disruptions in Parliament were essential in a democracy, but cautioned that they must not become an integral part of the democratic process.
The former Supreme Court judge said, earlier there was talk of a deficit economy, but now there is a “deficit in democracy” and claimed that though India continues to be a constitutional democracy, it is “under strain.” He welcomed the debate on whether the Constitution is under attack.
Justice (retd) Reddy said democracy is less about clash between individuals and more about clash between ideas, and wished ties between the government and the Opposition were better.
Justice (retd) Reddy, a former Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court, said his “journey of upholding the Constitution continues, ultimately culminating in, if given an opportunity, to protect and defend the Constitution.”
“I consider this journey to be the same, ultimately culminating in, if given an opportunity, to protect and defend the Constitution… Hitherto, I was upholding the Constitution and that is the oath administered to a judge…So this journey is nothing new to me,” he told PTI.
He said his unanimous candidature by the Opposition was a matter of honour. “First, it represents diversity. Secondly, the unanimous choice. Thirdly, in terms of voting strength, if you make an analysis, they represent more than 63-64 per cent of the population. What else could be an honour,” he said.
On the argument that top constitutional posts should be filled by consensus that reflects national unity, he said, “I wish there could have been a consensus. But you know the polity as it stands is a fractured one. In the circumstances, perhaps it is inevitable, leading to this contest.”
Justice (retd) Reddy said, “Earlier, we used to talk about a deficit economy, (now) there is a deficit in democracy. I do not say that India is no longer a democratic country. I don’t subscribe to that. We still continue to be a constitutional democracy, but under strain.”
He said earlier treasury and opposition benches used to coordinate on many national issues. “Unfortunately, we don’t find that today.”
He said the Vice-President election is not a contest between him and NDA’s C.P. Radhakrishnan, but a contest representing “two different ideologies.”
“… Here is a person, a quintessential RSS man… So far as I am concerned, I do not subscribe to that ideology and I am far, far, far, far away from it. I am essentially a liberal constitutional democrat. This is the area or rather the arena for the contest where the fight goes on,” he said.
He also quoted former BJP leader Arun Jaitley, who said “disruption also is a legitimate political activity and a parliamentary practice,” to champion disruption as a form of dissent.
“Disruption is nothing but one form of dissent. If you are not allowed to speak or express your views, this is one form of speaking. That’s how I look at the disruption. Not that I wish that disruption should become an essential and an integral part of democratic process,” Reddy said.
On Amit Shah’s attack on him over the Salwa Judum verdict, Justice (retd) Reddy said, “I do not wish to join an issue directly with the Honourable Home Minister of India, whose constitutional duty and obligation is to protect the life, liberty and property of every citizen, irrespective of ideological differences. Secondly, I have authored the judgement. The judgement is not mine, the judgement is of the Supreme Court.”
Justice (retd) Reddy said he wished Mr. Shah read the judgment, which runs up to 40 pages. “If he had read the judgement, perhaps he would not have made that comment. That’s all I say and leave it there… There must be decency in the debate,” he asserted.
He also threw his support behind the caste survey, saying one has to first find out the percentage of those who need to be succoured.
On the controversy over inclusion of ‘socialist’, ‘secular’ in the Preamble, he said, according to him the expressions have made things explicit, which is otherwise inbuilt in the provisions of the Constitution.
“Both the words which are made explicit, the ideas contained in the Constitution are welcome. It is true that the amendment came, that is 42nd Amendment, when emergency was invoked. But, one must remember, the Jana Sangh which formed the government later, unanimously approved it. Therefore, one fails to understand with what intention that debate is being triggered,” he said.
On different narratives on Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedkar, Justice (retd) Reddy said if you read the three superficially, some misconceptions and misunderstanding come to mind.
“Quintessentially, all three of them were great Democrats, Republicans and believed in the ethics and morals of the Constitution. I do not think it would be in the interest of the nation to divide them into three segments. And one supporting and the other opposing and creating a false narrative is not in the nation’s interest,” he stressed.
Published – August 23, 2025 03:56 pm IST
