India's democratic system exhibits substantial commercialisation, characterised by electoral expenditures expanding at remarkable rates.
The commercialisation of democracy in India encompasses the escalating influence of financial resources, corporate interests, and expensive promotional strategies throughout electoral processes. This phenomenon transforms democratic engagement into a commercially-oriented activity, sidelining average citizens, escalating electoral expenditures, and intertwining corporate influence with political authority. India's democratic system exhibits substantial commercialisation, characterised by electoral expenditures expanding at remarkable rates. Analysts and research institutions consistently identify Indian general elections as the costliest democratic undertaking globally, surpassing even United States presidential campaigns.
According to the Centre for Media Studies (CMS), aggregate expenditure during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections reached approximately INR 1.35 lakh crore ($16 billion), representing more than a twofold increase from the INR 60,000 crore ($8.5 billion) expended in 2019. This corresponds to expenditure of roughly INR 1,400 per voter (in contrast to approximately INR 700 per voter during 2019). Parliamentary candidates face legally mandated expenditure restrictions ranging from INR 75 lakh to INR 95 lakh, contingent upon their respective state. The Actual Expenditure: Research from the international Cost of Politics initiative demonstrates that genuine expenditure for a viable Lok Sabha candidate presently ranges from INR 5 crore to INR 10 crore, with intensely contested constituencies occasionally reaching INR 100 crore.
During the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, 'crorepati' candidates (possessing assets exceeding INR 1 crore) demonstrated a victory probability of 19.6%. Conversely, candidates with assets below INR 1 crore achieved a success rate of merely 0.7%. CMS research suggests that between INR 12,000 crore and INR 15,000 crore is transferred directly to voters through monetary distributions or material incentives proceeding Election Day. Field-based investigations conducted by the Cost of Politics network reveal that monetary transfers typically amount to INR 2,000 to INR 3,000 per voter in intensely competitive regional constituencies. An audit report conducted by the Association for Democratic Reforms examining the 2024 electoral cycle demonstrated that among the INR 7,445 crore aggregated by 32 examined national and regional political organizations, the Bharatiya Janata Party represented 84.18% (INR 6,268 crore) of the aggregate funds mobilized
Impacts
As electoral campaigns become progressively more costly, political parties demonstrate a pronounced preference for affluent candidates possessing the financial capacity to independently fund their campaigns. This financial prerequisite establishes a substantial barrier that effectively prevents grassroots leaders and ordinary citizens from participating in electoral contests. Research conducted by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) consistently documents this phenomenon. During the 2024 Lok Sabha Elections, approximately 90% of elected Members of Parliament (MPs) were classified as "crorepatis" (millionaires), demonstrating that political representation in India has effectively transformed into an exclusive domain.
When political parties depend upon substantial corporate funding to finance their electoral campaigns, a transactional dynamic emerges. Following their assumption of power, governments frequently face incentives to adjust policies, tax legislation, and resource distribution mechanisms to serve the interests of their financial contributors. The Electoral Bonds Scheme (established in 2018 and invalidated by the Supreme Court in 2024) exemplified this relationship. Publicly available information demonstrated that prominent corporate entities purchased thousands of crores in bonds to support political parties, generating allegations of "quid pro quo" arrangements, tax concessions, and preferential consideration in sectors including infrastructure and mining.
The commodification of democratic processes has transformed elected representatives into tradeable assets capable of being purchased or exchanged to modify legislative compositions. Such conduct undermines the legitimacy of public mandates and destabilises democratic institutions. Throughout the preceding ten years, numerous state administrations have experienced dissolution or realignment as a consequence of MLA defections. The phenomenon designated as "Resort Politics" gained prominence when political organisations transported their legislators to upscale resort facilities to shield them from acquisition attempts by competing political entities. To maintain substantial advertising revenues, numerous mainstream media organisations have compromised their journalistic integrity. Rather than functioning as the fourth estate of democracy, they frequently operate as corporate communications entities or partisan instruments serving political organisations.
Summing up, the commodification of Indian democracy transforms a dynamic, participatory civic process into a commercial enterprise. Although India demonstrates proficiency in procedural democracy through the successful administration of extensive, recurring elections, its substantive democratic character is compromised by concentrated wealth distribution. This inequality diminishes the political influence of ordinary citizens and undermines the constitutional guarantee of political equality. Legislation establishing rigorous limitations on political party expenditures must be implemented, accompanied by the establishment of publicly financed election mechanisms. Political organisations require incorporation within the framework of the Right to Information Act. Provisions mandating internal democratic processes within parties and expedited judicial proceedings for criminal matters must be enforced with greater stringency. The Election Commission of India requires enhanced authorisation to utilise advanced digital technologies, and statutory provisions imposing severe disqualification penalties for bribery offenses must be strengthened.
Mithilesh Kumar Sinha
Retired Professor
Nagaland University, Lumami