We cannot become “Vishwa Guru” with this kind of system which distrusts its own people. If we wish to join the group of well administered countries where rule of law reigns supreme, we need to first consciously decolonize our laws and institutions. Colonial-era statutes that prioritize control over liberty must be reviewed and repealed or rewritten, writes former IAS officer V.S.Pandey
India is a nation of infinite potential which it has, however, failed to optimize. It is bestowed with huge minerals deposits and other natural resources including having the highest irrigated arable land in the world, plenty of sunshine, no extreme weather conditions, vast network of rivers, huge coastline, plenty of rainfall to name a few. Still, after 77years of self-rule, it finds itself in the ranks of poor countries. Why have we failed to reach our potential as a country? There are several factors which keep pulling down our great nation.
Salient factors like all pervasive corruption in every walk of life, a dishonest and divisive political system are vital. Another very important factor, which has very adversely impacted the lives of our people and has negatively impacted our countries destiny is the distrust our system displays towards its own citizens. Even today it continues to be governed by a mindset inherited from its colonial past—a mindset fundamentally rooted in distrust of its own people. Obviously, the British colonial rule in India was not designed to serve citizens but to control subjects and exploit our wealth. Hence Laws, institutions, and administrative practices were crafted on the assumption that natives were prone to disorder, dishonesty, and rebellion, and therefore required constant surveillance, regulation, and coercion. Sadly, despite political freedom, much of this architecture of embedded distrust still survives.
The British administration in India was never meant to empower Indians. It was a ruling apparatus for a foreign power subjugating a vast population with minimal manpower. To maintain control, the British relied on excessive documentation, permissions, policing, and punitive laws. So the bureaucracy was accordingly designed and nurtured to function as an instrument of domination, not service. The district collector was all-powerful; the police were feared rather than respected; courts were distant and slow; and citizens were treated as potential offenders. Trust was absent because the ruler had no moral or emotional bond with the despicable ruled.
After Independence, power was transferred from the British rulers to Indian elites, but the governing mindset remained largely unchanged. Instead of redesigning institutions to suit a democratic republic, India often chose continuity in the name of stability. Colonial laws were retained, bureaucratic hierarchies preserved, and administrative discretion remained wide and opaque. As a result, even today the Indian state often treats citizens as suspects rather than stakeholders. Whether it is the need for multiple certificates, affidavits, licenses, inspections, or permissions, the underlying assumption is that citizens will cheat-unless tightly controlled. Welfare beneficiaries must repeatedly prove their poverty. Businesses must demonstrate compliance at every step. Taxpayers are presumed guilty until proven innocent. This deep institutional distrust permeates and corrodes state-citizen relations.
In the year 2026 too, persistence of distrust manifests itself across sectors. In governance, rules dominate outcomes, and discretion trumps accountability. Officials fear decision-making because systems punish honest mistakes but rarely reward integrity or initiative. Citizens face harassment for minor non-compliance, while large offenders often escape through influence. In policing, colonial attitudes remain brazen. The police are still trained primarily to maintain “law and order,” not to protect citizens’ rights. Preventive arrests, excessive force, and misuse of laws reflect a belief that authority must dominate society. The Police Act of 1861, designed to suppress rebellion, still governs much of Indian policing.
In economic life, excessive regulation and inspections signal distrust of entrepreneurs. India’s infamous “inspector raj” has been somewhat diluted but not eliminated. Compliance burdens push honest businesses into informality and corruption, weakening the economy and public morale.
Our citizens distrust -based governance has cost us dearly. It breeds corruption, because when compliance is complex and punitive, bribery becomes a survival strategy. It discourages innovation, because people fear failure and official reprisals. It undermines dignity, as citizens are forced to plead, queue, and prove their innocence repeatedly.
Most importantly, it weakens democracy. A democracy thrives on voluntary compliance, civic responsibility, and mutual respect. When the state does not trust citizens, citizens in turn stop trusting the state. Laws are seen as obstacles rather than moral commitments. This erosion of trust creates a vicious cycle of non-compliance and coercion.
Undoubtably, we cannot become “Vishwa Guru” with this kind of system which distrusts its own people. If we wish to join the group of well administered countries where rule of law reigns supreme, we need to first consciously decolonize our laws and institutions. Colonial-era statutes that prioritize control over liberty must be reviewed and repealed or rewritten. Sedition-like provisions, excessive preventive detention powers, and vague offences should give way to narrowly tailored, rights-respecting laws. Legal reform must be guided by constitutional morality, not administrative convenience.
Second, bureaucratic culture must shift from rule-obsession to outcome-orientation. Officials should be evaluated on service delivery, grievance redressal, and citizen satisfaction, not merely file-processing or procedural compliance. Honest decision-making should be protected, and fear of vigilance and post-facto punishment must be reduced.
Third, trust should be built into regulatory design. Self-certification, randomized audits, risk-based inspections, and digital transparency can replace universal suspicion. Fourth, police reforms are essential. Policing must be re-imagined as a service, not a force. If India is to realize its full democratic and developmental potential, it must consciously dismantle this legacy and replace it with a governance model based on trust, dignity, and partnership with citizens.
Fifth, citizens must be treated as partners in governance. Participatory mechanisms—strong gram sabhas, citizen charters, social audits, public consultations—help build mutual trust. When people are involved in decision-making, compliance becomes voluntary and ownership increases.
Sixth, education and civil services training must emphasize democratic ethics. Administrators should be taught that authority flows from the Constitution and the people, not from colonial precedent. Empathy, humility, and service should be celebrated as core administrative virtues.
It must be understood properly that trust-based governance does not mean absence of regulation or accountability. It means shifting from presumption of guilt to presumption of honesty, backed by strong but fair enforcement against genuine wrongdoing. Mature states trust their citizens and punish violations proportionately; insecure states over-regulate everyone.
Nations that have achieved high levels of development and social cohesion—whether in Europe or anywhere, have done so by building institutions that assume basic civic responsibility. India, with its long civilizational history of self-governance and community regulation, is well suited for such a transition.
After 77 years of self-rule, India must ask a fundamental question: are we governing a free people or controlling a suspect population? The colonial system was built on distrust because it lacked legitimacy. Independent India, grounded in popular sovereignty and constitutional democracy, has no such excuse.
Trusting citizens is not a concession; it is a necessity for progress. Only by dismantling the colonial architecture of suspicion and embracing a partnership model of governance can India unlock the full potential of its people. True independence will be achieved not by rulers being Indian, but by the state genuinely believing in its citizens.
If India is to realize its full democratic and developmental potential, it must consciously dismantle this suspect legacy and replace it with a governance model based on trust, dignity, and partnership with citizens.
(Vijay Shankar Pandey is former Secretary Government of India)
