The protest at Jantar Mantar was not merely about irregularities in the NEET examination. In
many ways, it reflected a simmering discontent that has been building for some
time—particularly among the country’s youth, who increasingly find themselves questioning
the credibility, transparency and accountability of institutions that directly affect their lives
and aspirations.
Protests are an essential part of a democracy. They give citizens a voice when they feel
unheard. But perhaps the larger question before us is: Can we create spaces where anger
and disagreement can be transformed into informed dialogue and constructive action?
For every institution or system confronted with allegations of irregularities, inefficiency or
corruption, a disciplined and civil dialogue initiated by young citizens can become a powerful
democratic instrument. Rather than merely raising slogans against a system, young people
could be encouraged to question it, understand it and participate in discussions on how it can
be improved.
The reality is that there are few areas of public life that have remained untouched by
allegations of corruption, irregularities or institutional shortcomings. This, however, should
not lead to cynicism or a loss of faith in democracy. Instead, it should encourage us to create
stronger mechanisms of public engagement and accountability.
Imagine a series of “Youth Dialogues” organised across colleges and universities, where
knowledgeable and articulate young people sit across the table from representatives of
institutions they wish to question. Doctors could discuss healthcare systems; bureaucrats
could respond to questions on governance; professors could engage with students on
education; journalists could discuss media accountability; jurists could explain the
functioning of the justice system; and experts from other fields could participate wherever
public concerns arise.
The objective would not be to put institutions in the dock, nor to turn these discussions into
political confrontations. The purpose would be to ask difficult questions, hear informed
answers and explore possible solutions.
Such dialogues could be organised through university forums, debating clubs, media
departments, civil society organisations or independent youth platforms. Conducted with
preparation, facts, discipline and mutual respect, they could become much more than
academic debates.
India’s democracy does not merely need young people who can protest. It needs young
people who can question, debate, listen, reason and propose solutions.
Perhaps the time has come to move beyond the street as the only visible expression of youth
dissatisfaction—and create a democratic culture where every difficult question has a dignified
platform for dialogue.
