Himangshu Ranjan Bhuyan
(hrbhuyancolumnist@gmail.com)
At present, across the country and particularly in the political landscape of Assam, “party switching” or “defection” has become a very familiar and widely discussed issue. It has now become a very common occurrence for a leader, after winning an election based on the ideology of a particular political party, to join another party driven by personal interest or the lure of power. This tendency has shaken the very foundation of democracy. When a leader switches parties, it is not merely a journey from one party to another; along with that journey, the trust and confidence of thousands of voters also fade away. An ordinary voter casts their valuable vote in support of the manifesto, goals, and ideology of a specific party. But when that same leader joins an opposing camp after the election, the voter feels as though their democratic right has been betrayed. Although political leaders describe such moves as “steps taken for development” or “decisions made in the interest of the people”, the general public is unaware of the opportunistic politics hidden behind them. In today’s politics, power and convenience have gained more importance than morality and values, which has created a major obstacle to the healthy development of society. Especially in this election season of the Assam Legislative Assembly, the wave of defections seen in the state’s political circles is truly concerning. This tendency to move toward the ruling side is weakening the opposition and attempting to create an environment of consolidated power where dissent has no place. A public representative should place moral responsibility above all else, but today, personal gains and the lure of positions have crossed all boundaries of principles. As a result, a political culture has emerged that not only disappoints the public but also discourages the younger generation from engaging in politics. To preserve the sanctity of democracy, the time has come for people to question the credibility of such opportunistic leaders.
For a leader, their ideology is their true identity. But when the lure of power becomes stronger than emotion and ideals, a severe crisis of credibility arises. Recently, the defection of several senior leaders in Assam has created unprecedented turmoil in the state’s politics. Leaders who served a particular party for more than three decades, even holding top positions, have taken shelter in the ruling party at the final moment, leaving the general public deeply shocked. The reasons they provide are often similar—they claim to have lost a working environment in their former party or lost faith in its leadership. However, the conscious section of society questions why they did not feel this way during all those years when they enjoyed opportunities under the same leadership. The timing of such changes, especially just before elections or during moments of personal political crisis, clearly indicates that not ideological conflict but calculations of future power and positions are the real driving force. When a leader changes parties, the thousands of grassroots workers associated with them are left in a pitiable condition. Those who worked tirelessly for the leader suddenly face an uncertain future. This leads to a deterioration of political culture and erodes the value of a leader’s words in society. Once credibility is lost, regaining it is one of the most difficult tasks in the world, yet defecting leaders knowingly stain their character for temporary gains.
The Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, known as the anti-defection law, was introduced to curb this political malpractice, but it cannot be said to have been entirely successful in practice. Leaders continue to exploit various legal loopholes to switch parties as per their convenience. For instance, if two-thirds of the members of a party join another party together, their membership is not disqualified. This provision has effectively given legal recognition and encouragement to mass defections. The days of one or two individuals secretly switching sides are over; now, public and large-scale defections have become a dangerous new trend. Moreover, the excessive delay in decisions by the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly has often provided long-term protection to defecting leaders. Since the Speaker is usually from the ruling party, action against defectors, especially those from the opposition, is often delayed for years. Political developments across the country in 2025 and 2026 have once again demonstrated that political gains and the game of forming and toppling governments are stronger than written laws. Instances of cross-voting in Rajya Sabha elections, where members vote secretly against their own party, further highlight the absence of morality. Leaders adopt various strategies to escape legal consequences, causing severe and irreparable damage to democratic values. Unless the anti-defection law is made stricter and the authority to decide such matters is entrusted to an impartial judicial body, the culture of “Aya Ram Gaya Ram” will not end. A strict provision is necessary whereby any elected representative who switches parties after an election should face immediate disqualification and be barred from contesting elections for a certain period.
It is an open secret in today’s politics that many leaders join the ruling party to escape serious corruption charges against them. The public has mockingly started calling this phenomenon a “washing machine”. A leader who was accused of massive corruption just yesterday suddenly becomes clean once they join the ruling side. This situation completely erodes public faith in the rule of law. People begin to believe that there are no real criminals in politics, only the powerless and the powerful. Such negative politics also destroys the perceived neutrality of government institutions. When political loyalty becomes more important than legal principles, the future of democracy moves towards darkness. The credibility of such leaders does not end only in their former party; it also creates dissatisfaction among loyal workers of the new party they join. Workers who sacrificed for years for their party’s ideology suddenly see their former strongest critic becoming their new leader. This disrupts organizational discipline and fosters a purely power-centric opportunistic environment devoid of principles.
A strong opposition is essential for a healthy and robust democracy. But if influential leaders of opposition parties continue to join the ruling side one by one, who will question the government’s mistakes? The absence of opposition gradually paves the way for authoritarian governance, which is never beneficial for the people. A politics devoid of opposition cannot ensure public welfare because it lacks accountability. In a state like Assam, with a rich history of regionalism, frequent defections by regional leaders under the influence of national parties have created deep concern among conscious citizens. Instead of fearlessly voicing regional issues, surrendering to central power reflects a submissive mentality that strikes at the self-respect of Assamese society. A popular leader carries the hopes of society, especially the younger generation. Their words can inspire thousands. But when that same leader changes allegiance for personal gain, the respect built over years collapses instantly. If politics becomes merely a profitable profession or business, there is no place left for public service. Unless the public teaches such opportunistic leaders a lesson in upcoming elections, politics may turn into a vulgar arena of money, muscle power, and authority, where honesty has no place.
An analysis of defecting leaders reveals that they often lack any consistent political philosophy. The ideology they loudly proclaim as the best today may be denounced by them as harmful tomorrow without hesitation. This indicates intellectual bankruptcy. The greatest asset of a politician is public trust in their words. Without that trust, their speeches are nothing more than empty noise. Society has now reached a point where people hesitate to believe politicians. When leaders criticize their former party after switching sides, it often exposes their own weaknesses. If those flaws existed, why did they not notice them earlier during their long association? Or were they ignoring them for personal benefits? Such questions expose their moral position completely. Differences in opinion are natural and are part of democracy’s beauty, but repeatedly switching parties in the name of differences is unacceptable. This tendency destroys healthy political competition.
In Assam, the problem becomes more complex because emotional issues related to language and culture are always involved. Many leaders enter politics claiming to protect Assamese identity but eventually support the very forces they once opposed. Repeated betrayals have led to political apathy among the people. Citizens begin to believe that regardless of who comes to power, the objective remains the same—power itself. This apathy is extremely dangerous for democracy because when people disengage, corrupt and opportunistic elements gain more control. Therefore, it is time to critically examine the credibility of such leaders and make them understand that the public is not foolish and observes everything carefully.
During elections, one witnesses how leaders spend enormous amounts of money just to win. For defecting leaders, money and muscle power become primary tools. They believe they can compensate for the lack of ideology with wealth. But while money can buy votes, it cannot buy respect and genuine support. Leaders who switch sides for power must remember that power is not permanent. The government under whose shelter they take refuge today may not exist tomorrow. When that happens, they will have no moral justification left to switch sides again. History never honours such leaders. Those who stand firm on their ideals are remembered even if they lose, but defectors fade into oblivion once they lose power.
As voters, we also have significant responsibilities. Leaders switch parties because they know that a lack of awareness still exists and that emotional appeals based on religion, caste, or community can easily win votes. If conscious voters reject such opportunistic leaders in by-elections or the upcoming 2026 general elections, it will force them to think twice before defecting again. Winning public trust, not power, should be the ultimate goal in politics. Unfortunately, manipulating public emotions has become an art. If leaders continue to win despite losing credibility, it indicates deep decay within the democratic system. To preserve democracy, society must socially reject leaders who lack stable character or ideology.
Political parties must also act responsibly. Welcoming any opportunistic or tainted individual from the opposition merely to increase seat numbers damages the party’s own dignity and historical image. A party that lacks committed workers and is filled with opportunists gradually becomes hollow from within. Ultimately, it can be said that the credibility of defecting leaders can never be genuine or lasting. Even if they temporarily enjoy power and position, history will remember them only as opportunists devoid of principles. To build a truly progressive and strong society, there is a need for dedicated leaders who remain steadfast in their ideals and stand with the people in all circumstances. The future of a nation can never be secure in the hands of those who continuously switch sides for personal gain. To succeed in this democratic test, people must learn to analyze the character and past of leaders instead of blindly following them. Only then can a healthy and value-based political society be established.