Bharatpedia - User contributions [en]

Indian Idol (season 14)

2023-10-09T10:04:53Z

BritneyMcKillop: Created page with ' {{Infobox television season | bg_colour = #FF5F5F | season_number = 14 | module1 = {{Infobox reality competition season | judges = {{Plainlist| * Kumar Sanu * Shreya Ghoshal * Vishal Dadlani }} | host = Hussain Kuwajerwala | winner = | runner_up = }} | country = India | network = Sony Entertainment Television | first_aired = 7 October 2023 | last_aired...'

{{Short description|Indian TV show}}
{{Infobox television season
| bg_colour = #FF5F5F
| season_number = 14
| module1 = {{Infobox reality competition season
| judges = {{Plainlist|
* [[Kumar Sanu]]
* [[Shreya Ghoshal]]
* [[Vishal Dadlani]]
}}
| host = [[Hussain Kuwajerwala]]
| winner =
| runner_up =
}}
| country = India
| network = [[Sony Entertainment Television]]
| first_aired = {{Start date|2023|10|07|df=yes}}
| last_aired = present
}}

The fourteenth season of ''[[Indian Idol (Hindi TV series)|Indian Idol]]'' premiered on 7 October 2023, on the [[Sony Entertainment Television]].

== Season overview ==

[[Hussain Kuwajerwala]] joined as host.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-08-21 |title=Netizens react to Kumkum's Hussein Kuwajerwala returning to Indian Idol with season 14 as a host after 11 years, fans write "Finally the OG host is back" |work=The Times of India |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/netizens-react-to-kumkums-hussein-kuwajerwala-returning-to-indian-idol-with-season-14-as-a-host-after-11-years-fans-write-finally-the-og-host-is-back/articleshow/102895001.cms |access-date=2023-09-23 |issn=0971-8257}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Desk |first1=India TV News |last2=News |first2=India TV |date=2023-08-22 |title=4 major changes will be seen in Indian Idol 14, everything changed from judges to host |url=https://www.indiatvnews.com/entertainment/tv/4-major-changes-will-be-seen-in-indian-idol-14-everything-changed-from-judge-to-host-2023-08-22-888223 |access-date=2023-09-23 |website=www.indiatvnews.com |language=en}}</ref> [[Vishal Dadlani]] returned as the judge while [[Shreya Ghoshal]] and [[Kumar Sanu]] joined as judges replacing [[Neha Kakkar]] and [[Himesh Reshammiya]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-09-14 |title=Indian Idol 14: Judge Vishal Dadlani opens up on reprising his role again: 'Indian Idol is an emotion for me' |url=https://www.pinkvilla.com/tv/news/indian-idol-14-judge-vishal-dadlani-opens-up-on-reprising-his-role-again-indian-idol-is-an-emotion-for-me-1243132 |access-date=2023-09-23 |website=PINKVILLA |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-09-05 |title=Kumar Sanu calls being a judge on Indian Idol 14 a 'new adventure', says "I've been a guest on the show many times in the past" |work=The Times of India |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/kumar-sanu-calls-being-a-judge-on-indian-idol-14-a-new-adventure-says-ive-been-a-guest-on-the-show-many-times-in-the-past/articleshow/103395281.cms |access-date=2023-09-23 |issn=0971-8257}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-08-28 |title="My journey from being a contestant on a reality show to now judging Indian Idol has been hard yet rewarding," says Shreya Ghoshal |work=The Times of India |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/my-journey-from-being-a-contestant-on-a-reality-show-to-now-judging-indian-idol-has-been-hard-yet-rewarding-says-shreya-ghoshal/articleshow/103132910.cms |access-date=2023-09-23 |issn=0971-8257}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-08-22 |title=Indian Idol 14: Kumar Sanu to judge the show alongside Shreya Ghoshal and Vishal Dadlani |work=The Times of India |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/indian-idol-14-kumar-sanu-to-judge-the-show-alongside-shreya-ghoshal-and-vishal-dadlani/articleshow/102947271.cms |access-date=2023-09-23 |issn=0971-8257}}</ref>

The auditions were announced by Fremantle India on their Instagram handle. Only producers' auditions were open this time. The shortlisted contestants are called Mumbai for filming of their audition in front of the judges. The judges then shortlist 15 contestants for the theatre round which are mentioned in the following list:
{| class="wikitable sortable" style=" text-align:center; line-height:25px; width:auto;"
!Name
!Hometown
!Result
!Place
|-
|Adya Mishra
|[[Faridabad]], [[Haryana]]
|
|
|-
|Mismi Bose
|[[Guwahati]], [[Assam]]
|
|
|-
|Vaibhav Gupta
|[[Kanpur]], [[Uttar Pradesh]]
|
|
|-
|Anjana Padmanabhan
|[[Bengaluru]], [[Karnataka]]
|
|
|-
|Subhadeep Das
|[[Mumbai]], [[Maharashtra]]
|
|
|-
|Dhroon Tickoo
|[[Amritsar]], [[Punjab, India|Punjab]]
|
|
|-
|Muskan Srivastava
|[[Ghaziabad]], [[Uttar Pradesh]]
|
|
|-
|Dipan Mitra
|[[Kolkata]], [[West Bengal]]
|
|
|-
|Menuka Bodel
|
|
|
|-
|Obom Tangu
|[[Arunachal Pradesh]]
|
|
|-
|Shivani Swami
|[[Karnatak]]
|
|
|-
|Pawan Nagar
|Haryana
|
|
|-
|Utkarsh Wankhede
|Nagpur
|
|
|-
|
|
|
|
|}

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Indian Idol]]

Aaliya Siddiqui

2023-07-20T09:32:07Z

BritneyMcKillop: Authored a new article.

'''Aaliya Siddiqui''' is an Indian film producer.

==Career==
After graduating, she began working in film production.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Nawazuddin Siddiqui’s estranged wife Aaliya dances to actor’s new song, calls it a ‘token of love’ for him. Watch |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/bollywood/nawazuddin-siddiqui-estranged-wife-aaliya-dances-new-song-token-of-love-for-him-watch-video-8773890/ |access-date=2023-07-20 |website=The Indian Express |language=en}}</ref>

She established her own film production company, YS Productions.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Aaliya Siddiqui talks about working with Nawazuddin Siddiqui on her maiden production venture 'Holy Cow' - Exclusive |work=The Times of India |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/aaliya-siddiqui-talks-about-working-with-nawazuddin-siddiqui-on-her-maiden-production-venture-holy-cow-exclusive/articleshow/99660670.cms |access-date=2023-07-20 |issn=0971-8257}}</ref> In 2022, she produced the Hindi film ''[[Holy Cow (film)|Holy Cow]]''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.outlookindia.com/art-entertainment/nawazuddin-siddiqui-s-estranged-wife-aaliya-thanks-him-for-doing-a-cameo-in-her-film-holy-cow--news-280265|title=Nawazuddin Siddiqui's Estranged Wife Aaliya Thanks Him for Doing A Cameo In Her Film 'Holy Cow'|website=Outlook India}}</ref>

She participated in '[[Bigg Boss OTT (Hindi season 2)|Big Boss OTT Season 2]]' in 2023.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.tellychakkar.com/digital/exclusive-aliya-siddiqui-entering-bigg-boss-ott-2-and-staying-away-her-children-says-the|title=Exclusive! Aliya Siddiqui on entering Bigg Boss OTT 2 and staying away from her children, says "The kids have their father and Nawaz is very nice, he will do everything for them”|website=Tellychakkar.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/binge-watch/story/aaliya-reveals-estranged-husband-nawazuddin-siddiquis-reaction-to-her-bigg-boss-ott-2-participation-2394399-2023-06-17|title=Aaliya reveals estranged husband Nawazuddin Siddiqui's reaction to her Bigg Boss OTT 2 participation|website=India Today}}</ref> It was streamed on [[JioCinema]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.tv9hindi.com/entertainment/ott/nawazuddin-siddiqui-ex-wife-aaliya-salman-khan-show-bigg-boss-ott-2-participate-1918236.html|title=सलमान के शो में नवाजुद्दीन सिद्दीकी की एक्स-वाइफ, रिलेशनशिप को लेकर चर्चा में|first=TV9|last=Bharatvarsh|website=TV9 Bharatvarsh}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Bigg Boss OTT 2’s most talked about contestant: Actor Nawazuddin’s ex-wife Aaliya Siddiqui |url=https://www.lifestyleasia.com/ind/culture/people/aaliya-siddiqui-bigg-boss-ott-2-contestant/ |access-date=2023-07-20 |website=Lifestyle Asia India |language=en-US}}</ref>

==Personal life==

In March 2010, she married actor [[Nawazuddin Siddiqui]]. They had two children together, Yaani and Shora. In 2020, during lockdown, were divorced.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videos/etimes/bollywood/you-have-a-daughter-aaliya-siddiqui-lashes-out-at-estranged-husband-nawazuddin-siddiqui-for-discussing-multiple-affairs-in-his-memoir/videoshow/101610699.cms|title='You have a daughter...': Aaliya Siddiqui lashes out at estranged husband Nawazuddin Siddiqui for discussing multiple affairs in his memoir | Etimes - Times of India Videos|website=The Times of India}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/the-controversies-nawazuddin-siddiqui-is-mired-in-3807501|title=Nawazuddin Siddiqui, His Wife Aaliya, Their Help: Breaking Down The Controversies|website=NDTV.com}}</ref>

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
* {{IMDb name|nm10482677}}
* {{instagram|aaliyasiddiquiofficial}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Siddiqui, Aaliya}}
[[Category:Living people]]
[[Category:1970s births]]
[[Category:Hindi film producers]]

2024 Indian general election in Manipur

2023-07-19T20:59:08Z

BritneyMcKillop: Published a well-researched resource.

{{Short description|Election to constitute the 18th Lok Sabha in 2024}}
{{Infobox election
| election_name = Next Indian general election in Manipur
| country = India
| flag_year =
| type = Parliamentary
| ongoing = no
| previous_election = 2019 Indian general election in Manipur
| previous_year = 2019
| next_election = 2029 Indian general election in Manipur
| next_year = 2029
| election_date = April/May 2024
| seats_for_election = 2 seats | image2 = [[File:Okram Ibobi Singh Official.jpg|100px]]
| leader2 = [[Okram Ibobi Singh]]
| party1 = Bharatiya Janata Party
| alliance1 = [[National Democratic Alliance|NDA]]
| seats_before1 = 1
| leader_since3=2019
| seats_before2 = 0
|last_election1=34.3%, 1 seat |last_election2= 24.7%, 0 seat | leader_since1 = 2017| image1 = [[File:N Biren Singh.jpg|100px]]
| leader1 = [[N. Biren Singh]]
| leader_since2 = 2007
| party2 = Indian National Congress
| alliance2= [[Manipur Progressive Secular Alliance|PSA]]
|image3=[[File:Flag of the Naga People's Front.png|115px]]
|party3=Naga People's Front
|alliance3= -
|seats_before3=1
|last_election3=22.5%, 1 seat
|leader3=[[Lorho S. Pfoze]]
| map_image = File: Manipur Wahlkreise Lok Sabha.svg
| map_size = 300px
| map_caption =
| title = [[Prime Minister]]
| posttitle = [[Prime Minister]] after election
| before_party = [[Bharatiya Janata Party|BJP]]
| before_election = [[Narendra Modi]]
| after_election =
| after_party =
}}

The [[2024 Indian general election]] in Manipur will be held in April/May 2024 to elect 26 members of [[18th Lok Sabha]] from 2 constituencies of Manipur.<ref>https://www.ifp.co.in/manipur/mpp-steps-up-to-regain-ecis-recognition-to-contest-2024-polls</ref><ref>https://news.abplive.com/news/india/picture-will-be-different-in-2024-polls-cm-nitish-after-5-jdu-mlas-join-bjp-in-manipur-1551561</ref>

==Parties and Alliances==
=== {{legend2|{{party color|National Democratic Alliance (India)}}|[[National Democratic Alliance (India)|National Democratic Alliance]]}} ===
{| class="wikitable" width="50%"
|+
!No.
!Party
!Flag
!Symbol
!Leader
!Photo
!Seats Contested
!Male Candidates
!Female Candidates
|-
|! style="text-align:center; background:{{party color|Bharatiya Janata Party}};color:white"|'''1.'''
| [[Bharatiya Janata Party]]
| [[File:BJP flag.svg|50px]]
| [[File:Lotos flower symbol.svg|50px]]
| [[Nongthombam Biren Singh]]
|[[File:N. Biren Singh.jpg|50px]]
|
|
|}

==={{legend2|{{party color|United Progressive Alliance}}|[[Manipur Progressive Secular Alliance]]}}===
{| class="wikitable" width="50%"
|+
!No.
!Party
!Flag
!Symbol
!Leader
!Photo
!Seats Contested
!Male Candidates
!Female Candidates
|-
|! style="text-align:center; background:{{party color|Indian National Congress}};color:white"|'''1.'''
| [[Indian National Congress]]
| [[File:Indian National Congress Flag.svg|50px]]
| [[File:Hand INC.svg|50px]]
| [[Okram Ibobi Singh]]
| [[File:The Chief Minister of Manipur Shri O. Ibobi Singh in New Delhi on February 2, 2006.jpg|50px]]
|
|
|
|-
|! style="text-align:center; background:{{party color|Communist Party of India}};color:white"|'''2.'''
| [[Communist Party of India]]
| [[File:CPI-banner.svg|frameless|50x50px]]
| [[File:CPI symbol.svg|frameless|50x50px]]
| L. Sotin Kumar
|
|
|
|}
* '''[[Naga People's Front]]'''

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Indian general elections in Manipur]]

Religious profession

2023-06-19T06:53:04Z

BritneyMcKillop: Religious profession

{{short description|Solemn admission of people into a religious order by means of public vows}}
{{Multiple issues|
{{Expert needed|1=Religion|reason=Expansion and discussion needed on the scope of religious professions outside Catholicism|date=August 2020}}
{{Undue weight|date=August 2020}}
}}
{{for|profession of faith (public avowal of faith according to a traditional formula)|Creed}}

In the [[Catholic Church]], a '''religious profession''' is the solemn admission of men or women into [[consecrated life]] by means of the pronouncement of [[religious vows]], typically the [[evangelical counsels]].

== Usage ==
The [[1983 Code of Canon Law]] defines the term in relation to members of [[religious institute]]s as follows:<blockquote>
By religious profession members make a public vow to observe the three [[evangelical counsels]]. Through the ministry of the Church they are consecrated to God, and are incorporated into the institute, with the rights and duties defined by law.<ref>[http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P25.HTM Code of Canon Law 1983, canon 654]</ref>
</blockquote>

Catholic canon law also recognizes public profession of the evangelical counsels on the part of Christians who live the [[Hermit|eremitic]] or [[Anchorite|anchoritic]] life without being members of a religious institute:
<blockquote>
A hermit is recognized in the law as one dedicated to God in a [[consecrated life]] if he or she publicly professes the three evangelical counsels, confirmed by a vow or other sacred bond, in the hands of the diocesan bishop and observes his or her own plan of life under his direction.<ref>[http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P1X.HTM Code of Canon Law 1983, canon 603]</ref>
</blockquote>

== Procedure ==
Religious profession can be temporary or perpetual: "Temporary profession is to be made for the period defined by the institute's own law. This period may not be less than three years nor longer than six years."<ref>[http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P25.HTM Code of Canon Law, canon 655]</ref>

"When the period of time for which the profession was made has been completed, a religious who freely asks, and is judged suitable, is to be admitted to a renewal of profession or to perpetual profession; otherwise, the religious is to leave."<ref>[http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P25.HTM Code of Canon Law, canon 657]</ref>

Conditions for making a temporary religious profession are a minimum age of 18 years, completion of a regular novitiate, freedom of choice on the part of the person making the profession, and acceptance by the superior after a vote by the superior's council.<ref>[http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P25.HTM Code of Canon Law, canon 656]</ref> Additional conditions for making perpetual profession are a minimum age of 21 years and the completion of at least three years of temporary profession.<ref>[http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P25.HTM Code of Canon Law, canon 658]</ref>

Religious profession is often associated with the granting of a [[religious habit]], which the newly professed receives from the superior of the institute or from the [[bishop]]. Acceptance of the habit implies acceptance of the obligation of membership of the religious institute as well as the associated vows.

==History==

The origins of religious profession date from the time when Christians were recognized in the Church as followers after perfection in the practice of religious life. We meet them in the third century, under the name of ascetics, called in Greek ''asketai'', and in Latin ''confessores''. [[Eusebius of Caesarea]] (''[[Church History (Eusebius)|Church History]]'', III, xxxvii) numbers among the ascetics the most illustrious pontiffs of the first ages, [[St. Clement of Rome]], [[St. Ignatius of Antioch]], [[St. Polycarp]], and others. After these, in the fourth century, come the hermits and monks, followed in the eleventh century by the canons regular, in the thirteenth century by the mendicant orders, in the sixteenth by the clerks regular, and lastly by the members of religious congregations. Profession for a long time was made by clothing with the religious habit: the aspirant could personally put on the habit or receive it, with or without ceremony, from the abbot or from the bishop. This clothing laid upon him the obligation of poverty and chastity more as a natural consequence of a donation or consecration to God than as arising from formal vows, which did not exist at that time (cf. [[St. Basil]], Regulæ fusius tractatæ resp. ad 14 interrogat. in P. G., XXXI, 949–52).<ref name=Catholic/>

The community life, established under Schenoudi, the great disciple of St. Pachomius, added an explicit promise of fidelity to certain precepts. [[St. Benedict]] added an express promise of stability, and obedience to the superior. These last promises denoted obligations created in addition to those implied by taking the habit. The first formula, which expressly mentions poverty and chastity, is that of the Constitutions of Narbonne, promulgated in 1260 by St. Bonaventure for the [[Friars Minor]]. Then the constitutions of the Minims and clerks regular expressly mention the three essential vows of the religious life, as well as those superadded on account of the special ends of their orders. This discipline is common to religious orders and congregations. Finally the regulations (Normæ) of 1901, published in explanation of the present practice of the Holy See, do not permit in new congregations any but the three essential vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience.<ref name=Catholic/>

In the Decretal, "Quod votum," unic. De veto et voti redemptione (iii, 15) in 6°, [[Boniface VIII]] declared authoritatively that the vow of chastity, consecrated by the reception of major orders, or by religious profession in an approved institute, created a diriment impediment to marriage. Some communities of tertiaries not belonging to an approved order were the first to introduce profession accompanied by simple vows, which is now the ordinary practice in the more recent congregations.<ref name=Catholic/>

The "Annals of the Order of St. Benedict" (vol. I, p. 74)<ref>[http://www.hmml.org/exhibits/Maurists/Annales.htm "Annals of the Order of St Benedict"]</ref> in the year 537 recognized among the Greeks three classes of religious: the novices, who wore the simple tunic; the perfect, clothed with the pallium; and the more perfect invested with the cuculla, or hood attached to a short cloak, covering the shoulders, which was considered the special emblem of the religious life. In certain monasteries of the East, a distinction was made between persons wearing the short habit, mikroschemoi, and those wearing the long habit, megaloschemoi, a distinction against which St. Theodorus the Studite protested in his epistles (I, ep. x, in P. G., XCIX, 941–2), and which is still found among the Schismatic Coptic monks (see Kathol. Missionen 1 Oct., 1910, p. 7 sqq.). [[St. Ignatius of Loyola]] laid down that in his order there should be a simple profession, followed by more or less frequent renewal of vows until such time as the candidate should be prepared for the solemn or definitive profession; this under Pius IX and Leo XIII has become the common law of all religious orders.<ref name="Catholic">{{Catholic|title=Religious Profession|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12451b.htm}}</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Further reading==
* [[Columba_Marmion#Bl_Columba_Marmion|Dom Columba Marmion]], ''Christ the Ideal of the Monk'' (ch. VI "Monastic Profession")

{{RC consecrated life}}

[[Category:Catholic theology and doctrine]]
[[Category:Christian monasticism]]
[[Category:Christian terminology]]

[[de:Ordensgelübde]]

Personal law

2023-02-21T03:56:39Z

BritneyMcKillop: Article designed.

#REDIRECT [[Family law]]

Democratic backsliding

2022-10-24T04:00:01Z

BritneyMcKillop: Shared an engaging guide.

{{Short description|Liberal democracies becoming authoritarian}}
[[File:Number of countries experiencing autocratization and democratization, 1900–2000.jpg|thumb|upright=1.6|Since {{circa|2010}}, the [[Democratic backsliding by country|number of countries autocratizing]] (blue) is higher than those [[democratizing]] (yellow).]]
{{Use dmy dates}}

'''Democratic backsliding''', also called '''autocratization''',<ref name="Skaaning">{{cite journal |last1=Skaaning |first1=Svend-Erik |title=Waves of autocratization and democratization: a critical note on conceptualization and measurement |journal=Democratization |volume=27 |issue=8 |pages=1533–1542 |doi=10.1080/13510347.2020.1799194 |s2cid=225378571 |url=https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/211506495/Waves_of_autocratization_and_democratization_Accepted_manuscript_2020.pdf |access-date=7 November 2022 |archive-date=6 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230206094411/https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/211506495/Waves_of_autocratization_and_democratization_Accepted_manuscript_2020.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lührmann |first1=Anna |last2=Lindberg |first2=Staffan I. |title=A third wave of autocratization is here: what is new about it? |journal=Democratization |volume=26 |issue=7 |pages=1095–1113 |doi=10.1080/13510347.2019.1582029|s2cid=150992660 |doi-access=free|quote=The decline of democratic regime attributes – autocratization }}</ref>{{efn|Other names include democratic decline,<ref name=Mietzner>{{cite journal |last1=Mietzner |first1=Marcus |title=Sources of resistance to democratic decline: Indonesian civil society and its trials |journal=Democratization |date=2021 |volume=28 |issue=1 |pages=161–178 |doi=10.1080/13510347.2020.1796649|s2cid=225475139 }}</ref> de-democratization,<ref>[[Cas Mudde|Mudde, Cas]] and Kaltwasser, Cristóbal Rovira (2017) ''Populism: a Very Short Introduction''. New York: Oxford University Press. pp.86-96. {{isbn|978-0-19-023487-4}}</ref> democratic erosion,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Laebens |first1=Melis G. |last2=Lührmann |first2=Anna |title=What halts democratic erosion? The changing role of accountability |journal=Democratization |volume=28 |issue=5 |pages=908–928 |doi=10.1080/13510347.2021.1897109|s2cid=234870008 }}</ref> democratic decay,<ref name="Daly">{{cite journal |last1=Daly |first1=Tom Gerald |title=Democratic Decay: Conceptualising an Emerging Research Field |journal=Hague Journal on the Rule of Law |volume=11 |pages=9–36 |doi=10.1007/s40803-019-00086-2 |s2cid=159354232 }}</ref> democratic recession,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Huq |first1=Aziz Z |title=How (not) to explain a democratic recession |journal=International Journal of Constitutional Law |volume=19 |issue=2 |pages=723–737 |doi=10.1093/icon/moab058}}</ref> democratic regression,<ref name=Mietzner/> and democratic deconsolidation.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Chull Shin |first1=Doh |title=Democratic deconsolidation in East Asia: exploring system realignments in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan |journal=Democratization |volume=28 |issue=1 |pages=142–160 |doi=10.1080/13510347.2020.1826438|s2cid=228959708 }}</ref> }} is "a process of [[regime change]] towards [[autocracy]] that makes the exercise of [[political power]] more arbitrary and [[political repression|repressive]] and that restricts the space for [[Public sphere|public contestation]] and [[political participation]] in the process of government selection".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Cassani |first1=Andrea |last2=Tomini |first2=Luca |title=Autocratization in post-Cold War Political Regimes |publisher=Springer International Publishing |isbn=978-3-030-03125-1 |pages=15–35 |language=en |chapter=What Autocratization Is}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |author=Walder, D. |author2=Lust, E. |title=Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding|journal=Annual Review of Political Science|volume=21|issue=1|pages=93–113|doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-050517-114628|doi-access=free|quote=Backsliding entails a deterioration of qualities associated with democratic governance, within any regime. In democratic regimes, it is a decline in the quality of democracy; in autocracies, it is a decline in democratic qualities of governance.}}</ref> Democratic decline involves the weakening of democratic institutions, such as the [[peaceful transition of power]] or [[free and fair elections]], or the violation of individual rights that underpin democracy, especially [[freedom of expression]].<ref>{{Cite web|last=Lindberg|first=Staffan I.|title=The Nature of Democratic Backsliding in Europe|url=https://carnegieeurope.eu/2018/07/24/nature-of-democratic-backsliding-in-europe-pub-76868|access-date=2021-01-27|website=Carnegie Europe|language=en|archive-date=13 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210413075045/https://carnegieeurope.eu/2018/07/24/nature-of-democratic-backsliding-in-europe-pub-76868|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Rocha Menocal 29–40">{{Cite journal|last1=Rocha Menocal|first1=Alina|last2=Fritz|first2=Verena|last3=Rakner|first3=Lise|title=Hybrid regimes and the challenges of deepening and sustaining democracy in developing countries1|url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10220460802217934|journal=South African Journal of International Affairs|language=en|volume=15|issue=1|pages=29–40|doi=10.1080/10220460802217934|s2cid=55589140|issn=1022-0461|access-date=27 January 2021|archive-date=21 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200121122048/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10220460802217934|url-status=live}}</ref>

Proposed causes of democratic backsliding include lack of public support for democracy, [[economic inequality]], [[culturally conservative]] reactions to societal changes, [[populist]] or [[Cult of personality|personalist]] politics, and external influence from [[great power politics]]. During crises, backsliding can occur when leaders impose autocratic rules during [[states of emergency]] that are either disproportionate to the severity of the crisis or remain in place after the situation has improved.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Pandemic Backsliding|publisher=V-Dem|url=https://www.v-dem.net/en/our-work/research-projects/pandemic-backsliding/|access-date=23 January 2021|website=www.v-dem.net|archive-date=21 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201221152151/https://www.v-dem.net/en/our-work/research-projects/pandemic-backsliding/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

While regime change through [[military coup]]s has declined since the end of the [[Cold War]], more subtle forms of backsliding have increased. During the [[third wave of democratization]] in the late twentieth century, many new, weakly institutionalized democracies were established; these regimes have been most vulnerable to democratic backsliding.<ref name=":02">{{Cite journal|last=Bermeo|first=Nancy|title=On Democratic Backsliding|url=https://sites.unimi.it/carbone/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Democratic-backsliding-Bermeo-JOD-2016.pdf|journal=Journal of Democracy|volume=27|issue=1|pages=5–19|doi=10.1353/jod.2016.0012|s2cid=155798358|issn=1086-3214|access-date=26 April 2019|archive-date=29 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210329004055/https://sites.unimi.it/carbone/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Democratic-backsliding-Bermeo-JOD-2016.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Rocha Menocal 29–40" /> The [[third wave of autocratization]] has been ongoing since 2010, when the number of [[liberal democracies]] was at an all-time high.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Maerz|first1=Seraphine F.|last2=Lührmann|first2=Anna|last3=Hellmeier|first3=Sebastian|last4=Grahn|first4=Sandra|last5=Lindberg|first5=Staffan I.|title=State of the world 2019: autocratization surges – resistance grows|journal=Democratization|volume=27|issue=6|pages=909–927|doi=10.1080/13510347.2020.1758670|issn=1351-0347|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Boese |first1=Vanessa A. |last2=Lundstedt |first2=Martin |last3=Morrison |first3=Kelly |last4=Sato |first4=Yuko |last5=Lindberg |first5=Staffan I. |title=State of the world 2021: autocratization changing its nature? |journal=Democratization |volume=29 |issue=6 |pages=983–1013 |doi=10.1080/13510347.2022.2069751 |s2cid=249031421 |issn=1351-0347|doi-access=free }}</ref> One quarter of the world's population lives under democratically backsliding [[hybrid regimes]] as of 2021.<ref name=IDEA>[https://www.idea.int/gsod/sites/default/files/2021-11/the-global-state-of-democracy-2021_0.pdf The Global State of Democracy 2021] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220809193024/https://www.idea.int/gsod/sites/default/files/2021-11/the-global-state-of-democracy-2021_0.pdf }}, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance</ref>

==Manifestations==
Democratic backsliding occurs when essential components of [[democracy]] are threatened. Examples of democratic backsliding include:<ref name="DemDigest">{{Cite web|url=http://www.demdigest.org/democratic-backsliding-happens/|title=How democratic backsliding happens|work=Democracy Digest|access-date=23 June 2017|archive-date=17 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200417061220/https://www.demdigest.org/democratic-backsliding-happens/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Waldner|first1=David|last2=Lust|first2=Ellen|title=Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding|journal=Annual Review of Political Science|language=en|volume=21|issue=1|pages=93–113|doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-050517-114628|issn=1094-2939|doi-access=free}}</ref>
* [[Free and fair election]]s are degraded;<ref name="DemDigest" />
* [[Liberalism|Liberal]] rights of [[freedom of speech]], [[Freedom of the press|press]]<ref name=":15">{{Cite journal|last=Diamond|first=Larry|title=Democratic regression in comparative perspective: scope, methods, and causes|journal=Democratization|volume=28|pages=22–42|doi=10.1080/13510347.2020.1807517|issn=1351-0347|doi-access=free}}</ref> and [[Freedom of association|association]] decline, impairing the ability of the political opposition to challenge the government, hold it to account, and propose alternatives to the current regime;<ref name="DemDigest" /><ref name=":15" />
* The [[rule of law]] (i.e., judicial and bureaucratic restraints on the government) is weakened,<ref name="DemDigest" /> such as when the [[independence of the judiciary]] is threatened, or when [[civil service]] tenure protections are weakened or eliminated.<ref name="HuqGinsburgVox">{{cite news |first1=Aziz |last1=Huq |first2=Tom |last2=Ginsburg |url=https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/2/21/14664568/lose-constitutional-democracy-autocracy-trump-authoritarian |title=How to lose a constitutional democracy |work=Vox' |access-date=5 September 2017 |archive-date=16 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210216171856/https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/2/21/14664568/lose-constitutional-democracy-autocracy-trump-authoritarian |url-status=live }}</ref>
* An over-emphasis on [[national security]] as response to acts of terrorism or perceived antagonists.<ref name="HuqGinsburgVox" />

== Forms ==
{{see|Hybrid regime}}
Democratic backsliding can occur in several common ways. Backsliding is often led by democratically elected leaders, who use "incremental rather than revolutionary" tactics.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web|url=https://institute.global/sites/default/files/articles/The-Populist-Harm-to-Democracy-An-Empirical-Assessment.pdf|title=The Populist Harm to Democracy: An Empirical Assessment|last1=Kyle|first1=Jordan|last2=Mounk|first2=Yascha|publisher=Tony Blair Institute for Global Change|access-date=17 May 2019|archive-date=30 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210130094058/https://institute.global/sites/default/files/articles/The-Populist-Harm-to-Democracy-An-Empirical-Assessment.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> As emphasized by [[Steven Levitsky]] and [[Daniel Ziblatt]], it is difficult to pinpoint a single specific moment at which a government is no longer democratic, given that this process of decline manifests "slowly, in barely visible steps".<ref name=":1" /> [[Ozan Varol]] uses the phrase ''stealth authoritarianism'' to describe the practice of an authoritarian leader (or a potential authoritarian leader) using "seemingly legitimate legal mechanisms for anti-democratic ends ... concealing anti-democratic practices under the mask of law."<ref name="Varol">{{Cite encyclopedia|author=[[Ozan Varol|Ozan O.Varol]]|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=e5WRDwAAQBAJ|title=Stealth Authoritarianism in Turkey|work=Constitutional Democracy in Crisis?|editor=Mark A. Graber|editor2=Sanford Levinson|editor3=Mark V. Tushnet|isbn=978-0-19-088898-5|publisher=Oxford University Press|oclc=1030444422|pages=339–354|access-date=29 May 2020|archive-date=17 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210317161150/https://www.google.com/books/edition/Constitutional_Democracy_in_Crisis/e5WRDwAAQBAJ|url-status=live}}</ref> Together with [[Juan Linz]] (1996),<ref>"Linz, J. and Stepan, A., 1998. Problems of democratic transition and consolidation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, p.38."</ref> Levitsky and Ziblatt developed and agreed upon their "litmus test", which includes what they believe to be the four key indicators of authoritarian behavior. These four factors are: rejection (or weak commitment to) democratic rules of the game, denial of the legitimacy of political opponents, toleration or encouragement of violence, and readiness to curtail civil liberties of opponents, including media. Varol describes the manipulation of libel laws, electoral laws, or "terrorism" laws as tools to target or discredit political opponents, and the employment of democratic rhetoric as a distraction from anti-democratic practices, as manifestations of stealth authoritarianism.<ref name="Varol" /> In addition to these key signs derived from the behavior of leaders, [[Samuel P. Huntington]] also describes culture as a main contributor to democratic backsliding, and goes on to argue that certain cultures are particularly hostile to democracy, but they don’t necessarily prohibit democratization.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6REC58gdt2sC&pg=PA23 |last=Huntington |first=Samuel P. |title=Democracy's Third Wave |publisher=University of Oklahoma Press |page=23 |isbn=9780806125169 |access-date=23 February 2021 |archive-date=17 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210317162749/https://books.google.com/books?id=6REC58gdt2sC&pg=PA23 |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Promissory coups===
In a promissory coup, an incumbent elected government is deposed in a [[coup d'etat]] by coup leaders who claim to defend democracy and promise to hold elections to restore democracy. In these situations, coup-makers emphasize the temporary and necessary nature of their intervention in order to ensure democracy in the future.<ref name=":02" /> This is unlike the more open-ended coups that occurred during the Cold War. Political scientist Nancy Bermeo says that "The share of successful coups that falls into the promissory category has risen significantly, from 35 percent before 1990 to 85 percent afterward."<ref name=":02" /> Examining 12 promissory coups in democratic states between 1990 and 2012, Bermeo found that "Few promissory coups were followed quickly by competitive elections, and fewer still paved the way for improved democracies."<ref name=":02" />

===Executive aggrandizement===
This process contains a series of institutional changes by the elected executives, impairing the ability of the political opposition to challenge the government and hold it to account. The most important feature of executive aggrandizement is that the institutional changes are made through legal channels, making it seem as if the elected official has a democratic mandate.<ref name=":02" /><ref name=":1">{{Cite book|title=How Democracies Die|last1=Levitsky|first1=Steven|last2=Ziblatt|first2=Daniel|publisher=Crown|year=2018|location=United States|pages=76–78}}</ref> Some examples of executive aggrandizement are the decline of media freedom and the weakening of the [[rule of law]] (i.e., judicial and bureaucratic restraints on the government), such as when judicial autonomy is threatened.<ref name=":02" />

[[File:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-14439, Rede Adolf Hitlers zum Ermächtigungsgesetz.jpg|thumb|315x315px|[[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] gives a speech to the [[Reichstag (Weimar Republic)|Reichstag]] in support of the [[Enabling Act of 1933|Enabling Act]]. The collapse of the [[Weimar Republic]] into [[Nazi Germany]] is perhaps the most infamous example of democratic backsliding.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Levitsky|first1=Steven|title=[[How Democracies Die]]|last2=Ziblatt|first2=Daniel|publisher=Crown|year=2018|isbn=978-1-5247-6293-3|location=New York|pages=95}}</ref> ]]

Over time, there has been a decline in [[Coup d'état|active coups]] (in which a power-seeking individual, or small group, seizes power through forcibly, violently removing an existing government) and [[self-coup]]s (involving "a freely elected chief executive suspending the constitution outright in order to amass power in one swift sweep") and an increase in ''executive aggrandizement''.<ref name=":02" /> Political scientist [[Nancy Bermeo]] notes that executive aggrandizement occurs over time, through institutional changes legitimized through legal means, such as new [[constituent assembly|constituent assemblies]], [[referendum]]s, or "existing courts or legislatures ... in cases where supporters of the executive gain majority control of such bodies."<ref name=":02" /> Bermeo notes that these methods mean that the aggrandizement of the executive "can be framed as having resulted from a democratic mandate."<ref name=":02" /> Executive aggrandizement is characterized by the presence of distress in axes of democracy, including institutional or horizontal accountability;<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/legitimacy-9780198825265?cc=nl&lang=en&|title=Legitimacy: The State and Beyond|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-882526-5|editor-last=Sadurski|editor-first=Wojciech|editor-link=Wojciech Sadurski|location=Oxford, New York|editor-last2=Sevel|editor-first2=Michael|editor-last3=Walton|editor-first3=Kevin}}</ref> and executive or discursive accountability.<ref>{{Cite book|chapter=III Factors, 25 Populism versus Democratic Governance|title=Constitutional Democracy in Crisis?|url=https://oxcon.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law/9780190888985.001.0001/law-9780190888985-chapter-25|isbn=9780190888985|last=Issacharoff|first=Samuel|editor3-first=Tushnet|editor3-last=Mark|editor2-first=Levinson|editor2-last=Sanford|editor1-first=Graber|editor1-last=Mark a|website=Oxford Constitutions|year=2018|language=en|doi=10.1093/law/9780190888985.001.0001|access-date=15 May 2020|archive-date=16 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210116125232/https://oxcon.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law/9780190888985.001.0001/law-9780190888985-chapter-25|url-status=live}}</ref>

===Incremental election subversion===
This form of democratic backsliding entails the [[Election subversion|subversion of]] [[free and fair elections]] by, for example, blocking media access, disqualifying opposition candidates and [[voter suppression]]. This form of backsliding typically takes place before Election Day and now tends to be done in a [[Boiling frog|slower and more incremental way]] that the changes may even seem not urgent to counter, making it tougher for watchdogs like the media to find and broadcast the cumulative threat of all the mostly small, but significant misconducts.<ref name=":02" /> While the accumulation of power is more likely to start with this slower linear progression, it can accelerate once voter power seems too divided or weakened to repair all the damage done to institutions.

==Causes and characteristics==

The [[V-Dem Institute#V-Party Dataset|V-Party Dataset]] demonstrates a statistically significantly greater probability of autocratization for victorious parties with very high populism, high anti-pluralism, lack of commitment to the democratic process, acceptance of political violence, far-right culturally or far-left economic characteristics.<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Medzihorsky, Juraj |author2=Lindberg, Staffan I |title=Walking the Talk: How to Identify Anti-Pluralist Parties |journal=Party Politics |doi=10.1177/13540688231153092 |hdl=2077/68137 |url=https://v-dem.net/media/publications/working_paper_116_final.pdf}}</ref>

===Populism===
[[Pippa Norris]] of the [[Harvard Kennedy School]] and the [[University of Sydney]] argues that the two "twin forces" pose the largest threat to [[Western world|Western]] [[Liberal democracy|liberal democracies]]: "sporadic and random [[terrorist attack]]s on domestic soil, which damage feelings of security, and the rise of [[populist]]-[[Authoritarianism|authoritarian]] forces, which feed parasitically upon these fears."<ref name="Norris">{{Cite web |url=http://journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/media/Journal%20of%20Democracy%20Web%20Exchange%20-%20Norris_0.pdf |title=Is Western Democracy Backsliding? Diagnosing the Risks |last=Norris |first=Pippa |author-link=Pippa Norris |website=Journal of Democracy |series=Online Exchange on "Democratic Deconsolidation" |publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press |language=en |type=Scholarly response to column published online |access-date=28 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180411111001/https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/media/Journal%20of%20Democracy%20Web%20Exchange%20-%20Norris_0.pdf |archive-date=11 April 2018 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Norris defines populism as "a governing style with three defining features":
#A rhetorical emphasis on the idea that "legitimate political authority is based on [[popular sovereignty]] and majority rule";
#Disapproval of, and challenges to the legitimacy of, established holders of "political, cultural, and economic power";
#Leadership by "maverick outsiders" who claim "to speak for the ''[[vox populi]]'' and to serve ordinary people."<ref name="Norris"/>
Some, but not all, populists are also authoritarian, emphasizing "the importance of protecting [[Traditionalist conservatism|traditional]] lifestyles against perceived threats from 'outsiders', even at the expense of civil liberties and [[minority rights]]."<ref name="Norris"/> According to Norris, the reinforcement of the insecurities from the "twin forces" has led to more support for populist-authoritarian leaders, and this latter risk was especially pronounced in the United States during the [[presidency of Donald Trump]]. For example, Norris argues that Trump benefited from the mistrust of "[[the establishment]]" and that he continuously sought to undermine faith in the legitimacy of the media and the [[Judicial independence|independence of the court]]s.<ref name="Norris"/>

In 2017, [[Cas Mudde]] and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser wrote:

<blockquote>Populism does not have the same effect in each stage of the democratization process. In fact, we suggest that populism tends to play a positive role in the promotion of electoral or minimal democracy, but a negative role when it comes to fostering the development of a full-fledged liberal democratic regime. Consequently, while populism tends to favor the democratization of authoritarian regimes, it is prone to diminish the quality of liberal democracies. Populism supports popular sovereignty, but it is inclined to oppose any limitations on majority rule, such as judicial independence and minority rights. Populism-in-power has led to processes of de-democratization (e.g., [[Viktor Orban|[Viktor] Orbán]] in Hungary or [[Hugo Chavez|[Hugo] Chávez]] in Venezuela) and, in some extreme cases, even to the breakdown of the democratic regime (e.g., [[Alberto Fujimori|[Alberto] Fujimori]] in Peru).<ref>[[Cas Mudde|Mudde, Cas]] and Kaltwasser, Cristóbal Rovira (2017) ''Populism: a Very Short Introduction''. New York: Oxford University Press. pp.95-96. {{isbn|978-0-19-023487-4}}</ref></blockquote>

A 2018 analysis by political scientists [[Yascha Mounk]] and Jordan Kyle links populism to democratic backsliding, showing that since 1990, "13 right-wing populist governments have been elected; of these, five brought about significant democratic backsliding. Over the same time period, 15 left-wing populist governments were elected; of these, the same number, five, brought about significant democratic backsliding."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/hard-data-populism-bolsonaro-trump/578878/|title=What Populists Do to Democracies|last=Kyle|first=Yascha Mounk, Jordan|website=The Atlantic|language=en-US|access-date=27 December 2018|archive-date=9 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210309020711/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/hard-data-populism-bolsonaro-trump/578878/|url-status=live}}</ref>

A December 2018 report by the [[Tony Blair Institute for Global Change]] concluded that populist rule, whether left- or right-wing, leads to a significant risk of democratic backsliding. The authors examine the effect of populism on three major aspects of democracy: the quality of democracy in general, [[Checks and Balances|checks and balances]] on executive power and citizens' right to politically participate in a meaningful way. They conclude that populist governments are four times more likely to cause harm to democratic institutions than non-populist governments. Also, more than half of populist leaders have amended or rewritten the countries' constitution, frequently in a way that eroded checks and balances on executive power. Lastly, populists attack individual rights such as freedom of the press, civil liberties, and political rights.<ref name=":3" />

In a 2018 journal article on democratic backsliding, scholars Licia Cianetti, James Dawson, and Seán Hanley argued that the emergence of populist movements in [[Central and Eastern Europe]], such as [[Andrej Babiš]]'s [[ANO 2011|ANO]] in the [[Czech Republic]], are "a potentially ambiguous phenomenon, articulating genuine societal demands for political reform and pushing issues of good governance centre stage, but further loosening the weak checks and balances that characterise post-communist democracy and embedding private interests at the core of the state."<ref name="Cianetti"/>

In a 2019 paper, presented to the International Society of Political Psychologists, [[Shawn Rosenberg]] argues that right-wing populism is exposing a vulnerability in democratic structures and that "democracy is likely to devour itself."<ref>{{Cite book|title=Democracy Devouring Itself: The Rise of the Incompetent Citizen and the Appeal of Right-Wing Populism|last=Rosenberg, S|publisher=eScholarship, University of California|oclc=1055900632}}</ref>

Around the world, citizens are voting away the democracies they claim to cherish. Scholars present evidence that this behaviour is driven in part by the belief that their opponents will undermine democracy first. In experimental studies, they revealed to partisans that their opponents are more committed to democratic norms than they think. As a result, the partisans became more committed to upholding democratic norms themselves and less willing to vote for candidates who break these norms. These findings suggest that aspiring autocrats may instigate democratic backsliding by accusing their opponents of subverting democracy and that we can foster democratic stability by informing partisans about the other side’s commitment to democracy.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Braley |first1=Alia |last2=Lenz |first2=Gabriel S. |last3=Adjodah |first3=Dhaval |last4=Rahnama |first4=Hossein |last5=Pentland |first5=Alex |title=Why voters who value democracy participate in democratic backsliding |journal=[[Nature Human Behaviour]] |pages=1–12 |doi=10.1038/s41562-023-01594-w|pmid=37217740 |s2cid=258842427 }}</ref>

===Economic inequality and social discontent===
Many [[political economy]] scholars, such as [[Daron Acemoglu]] and [[James A. Robinson (economist)|James A. Robinson]], have investigated the effect of income inequality on the democratic breakdown.<ref name=":2" /> Studies of democratic collapse show that [[economic inequality]] is significantly higher in countries that eventually move towards a more authoritarian model.<ref name=":4" /> Hungary is an example of a country where a large group of unemployed, low-educated people were dissatisfied with the high levels of inequality, especially after the [[financial crisis of 2007–2008]]. [[Viktor Orbán]] used this dissatisfaction of a relatively large segment of the population to his advantage, winning popular support by using national-populist rhetoric.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Greskovitz|first=Béla|title=The Hollowing and Backsliding of Democracy in East-Central Europe|journal=Global Policy|volume=6|issue=1|pages=28–37|doi=10.1111/1758-5899.12225}}</ref>

=== Personalism ===
{{See also|Business-firm party}}
A 2019 study found that personalism had an adverse impact on democracy in Latin America: "presidents who dominate their own weakly organized parties are more likely to seek to concentrate power, undermine horizontal accountability, and trample the rule of law than presidents who preside over parties that have an independent leadership and an institutionalized bureaucracy."<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Rhodes-Purdy|first1=Matthew|last2=Madrid|first2=Raúl L.|title=The perils of personalism|journal=Democratization|volume=27|issue=2|pages=321–339|doi=10.1080/13510347.2019.1696310|s2cid=212974380|issn=1351-0347}}</ref>

=== COVID-19 ===
{{Main article|Political impact of the COVID-19 pandemic|Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on journalism}}

Many national governments worldwide delayed, postponed or canceled a variety of democratic elections at both national and subnational governmental levels resulting in the [[COVID-19 pandemic]] opening gaps in the action of democracy.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.idea.int/news-media/multimedia-reports/global-overview-covid-19-impact-elections |title=Global overview of COVID-19: Impact on elections |website=www.idea.int |access-date=28 January 2021 |archive-date=13 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210313030648/https://www.idea.int/news-media/multimedia-reports/global-overview-covid-19-impact-elections |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lewkowicz|first1=Jacek|last2=Woźniak|first2=Michał|last3=Wrzesiński|first3=Michał|title=COVID-19 and erosion of democracy|url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2021.105682|url-status=live|access-date=25 November 2021|journal=Economic Modelling|volume=106|number=vol. 106, 105682|page=105682|doi=10.1016/j.econmod.2021.105682|pmid=34776576|pmc=8571542|archive-date=26 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211126191007/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264999321002716?via%3Dihub}}</ref>

According to the V-Dem Institute, only 39% of all countries have committed no or minor violations of democratic standards in response to COVID-19.<ref>B. Edgell, A., Grahn, S., Lachapelle, J., Lührmann, A. and F. Maerz, S. (2021). [https://web.archive.org/web/20210131170154/https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/b9/2e/b92e59da-2a06-4d2e-82a1-b0a8dece4af7/v-dem_policybrief-24_update-pandemic-backsliding_200702.pdf "An Update on Pandemic Backsliding: Democracy Four Months After the Beginning of the Covid-19 Pandemic".] V-dem.net. Accessed 31 January 2021.</ref> Regardless of the fact that liberal democracy was on the defensive and experiencing a rise of autocrats and authoritarian regimes in many parts of the world prior to the first coronavirus death in December 2019, the pandemic has had a major influence on democratic backsliding.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Keilitz |first1=Ingo |title=Illiberalism Enabled by the Coronavirus Pandemic: An Existential Threat to Judicial Independence |journal=International Journal for Court Administration |volume=11 |issue=2 |pages=2 |doi=10.36745/ijca.339 |s2cid=225514092 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

=== Great power politics ===
Great power transitions have contributed to democratic backsliding and the spread of authoritarianism in two ways: "First, the sudden rise of autocratic Great Powers led to waves of autocracy driven by conquest but also by self-interest and even admiration, as in the fascist wave of the 1930s or the post-1945 communist wave. Second, the sudden rise of democratic hegemons led to waves of democratization, but these waves inevitably overextended and collapsed, leading to failed consolidation and rollback."<ref>{{Citation|last=Gunitsky|first=Seva|title=Great Powers and the Spread of Autocracy Since the Cold War|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/before-and-after-the-fall/great-powers-and-the-spread-of-autocracy-since-the-cold-war/D7F3EC6F0C4B41F5742693AB13DE28AD|work=Before and After the Fall: World Politics and the End of the Cold War|pages=225–243|editor-last=Bartel|editor-first=Fritz|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/9781108910194.014|isbn=978-1-108-90677-7|s2cid=244851964|editor2-last=Monteiro|editor2-first=Nuno P.|access-date=17 December 2021|archive-date=11 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220111013819/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/before-and-after-the-fall/great-powers-and-the-spread-of-autocracy-since-the-cold-war/D7F3EC6F0C4B41F5742693AB13DE28AD|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Authoritarian values ===
Global variation in democracy is primarily explained by variance between popular adherence to authoritarian values vs. emancipative values, which explains around 70 percent of the variation of democracy between countries every year since 1960. Emancipative values, as measured by the [[World Values Survey]], have been consistently rising over time in response to increasing economic prosperity.<ref name=Welzel/>

A 2020 study, which used World Values Survey data, found that cultural conservatism was the ideological group most open to authoritarian governance within Western democracies. Within English-speaking Western democracies, "protection-based" attitudes combining cultural conservatism and leftist economic attitudes were the strongest predictor of support for authoritarian modes of governance.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Malka|first1=Ariel|last2=Lelkes|first2=Yphtach|last3=Bakker|first3=Bert N.|last4=Spivack|first4=Eliyahu|title=Who Is Open to Authoritarian Governance within Western Democracies?|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/who-is-open-to-authoritarian-governance-within-western-democracies/0ADCD5FFE5B7E9267E8283C7561FB6BE|journal=Perspectives on Politics|volume=20 |issue=3 |language=en|pages=808–827|doi=10.1017/S1537592720002091|s2cid=225207244|issn=1537-5927|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=28 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210128174710/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/who-is-open-to-authoritarian-governance-within-western-democracies/0ADCD5FFE5B7E9267E8283C7561FB6BE|url-status=live}}</ref>

Professor [[Jessica Stern]] and the political psychologist Karen Stenner write that international research finds that "perceptions of sociocultural threat" (such as rising ethnic diversity, tolerance for [[LGBT]] people) are more important in explaining how democracies turn authoritarian compared to economic inequality (though they include economic threats such as globalization and the rising prosperity of other ethnic groups).<ref>{{cite news |title=How to Live With Authoritarians |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/11/capitol-insurrection-trump-authoritarianism-psychology-innate-fear-envy-change-diversity-populism/ |magazine=[[Foreign Policy]] |author2=Jessica Stern |author1=Karen Stenner |access-date=17 January 2022 |archive-date=12 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220112134405/https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/11/capitol-insurrection-trump-authoritarianism-psychology-innate-fear-envy-change-diversity-populism/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Stern and Stenner say about a third of the population in Western countries is predisposed to favor homogeneity, obedience, and strong leaders over diversity and freedom. In their view, authoritarianism is only loosely correlated with conservatism, which may defend a liberal democracy as the status quo.

Political scientist [[Christian Welzel]] argues that the third wave of democratization overshot the demand for democracy in some countries. Therefore, Welzel sees the current autocratization trend as [[regression to the mean]], but expects that it too will reverse in response to long-term changes in values.<ref name=Welzel>{{cite journal |last1=Welzel |first1=Christian |title=Why The Future Is Democratic |journal=Journal of Democracy |volume=32 |issue=2 |pages=132–144 |doi=10.1353/jod.2021.0024 |s2cid=234920048 |url=https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/why-the-future-is-democratic/ |issn=1086-3214 |access-date=28 February 2022 |archive-date=28 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220228041154/https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/why-the-future-is-democratic/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Polarization, misinformation, incrementalism, and multi-factor explanations ===

The 2019 Annual Democracy Report of the V-Dem Institute at the [[University of Gothenburg]] identified three challenges confronting global democracy: (1) "Government manipulation of media, civil society, rule of law, and elections"; (2) rising "toxic polarization", including "the division of society into distrustful, antagonistic camps"; diminishing "respect for opponents, factual reasoning, and engagement with society" among political elites; and increasing use of [[hate speech]] by political leaders; and (3) foreign disinformation campaigns, primarily digital, and mostly affecting Taiwan, the United States, and former [[Soviet bloc]] nations such as [[Latvia]].<ref name="2019VDem">{{Cite report|url=https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/99/de/99dedd73-f8bc-484c-8b91-44ba601b6e6b/v-dem_democracy_report_2019.pdf|title=Democracy Facing Global Challenges: V-Dem Annual Democracy Report 2019|publisher=V-Dem Institute at the [[University of Gothenburg]]|access-date=2 January 2020|archive-date=5 June 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190605230333/https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/99/de/99dedd73-f8bc-484c-8b91-44ba601b6e6b/v-dem_democracy_report_2019.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

According to [[Suzanne Mettler]] and [[Robert C. Lieberman]], four characteristics have typically provided the conditions for democratic backsliding (alone or in combination): [[Political polarization]], racism and nativism, economic inequality, and excessive executive power.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Mettler|first=Suzanne|url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/1155487679|title=Four Threats: The Recurring Crises of American Democracy|publisher=St. Martin's Press|year=2020|isbn=978-1-250-24442-0|location=New York|oclc=1155487679|access-date=14 August 2020|archive-date=17 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210317155808/https://www.worldcat.org/title/four-threats-the-recurring-crises-of-american-democracy/oclc/1155487679|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=History tells us there are four key threats to U.S. democracy|author=Farrell, Henry|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/14/history-tells-us-there-are-four-key-threats-us-democracy/|access-date=14 August 2020|archive-date=18 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210118163030/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/14/history-tells-us-there-are-four-key-threats-us-democracy/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Lieberman|first=By Suzanne Mettler and Robert C.|title=The Fragile Republic|url=https://reader.foreignaffairs.com/2020/08/10/the-fragile-republic/content.html|access-date=15 August 2020|website=Foreign Affairs|language=en-GB|archive-date=6 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201106005911/https://reader.foreignaffairs.com/2020/08/10/the-fragile-republic/content.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Stephen Haggard and Robert Kaufman highlight three key causes of backsliding: "the pernicious effects of polarization; realignments of party systems that enable elected autocrats to gain legislative power; and the incremental nature of derogations, which divides oppositions and keeps them off balance."<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Haggard|first1=Stephan|last2=Kaufman|first2=Robert|title=Backsliding: Democratic Regress in the Contemporary World|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/backsliding/CCD2F28FB63A56409FF8911351F2E937|access-date=21 January 2021|website=Cambridge University Press|language=en|doi=10.1017/9781108957809|isbn=9781108957809|s2cid=242013001|archive-date=3 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210303135223/https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/backsliding/CCD2F28FB63A56409FF8911351F2E937|url-status=live}}</ref> A 2022 study linked polarization to support for undemocratic politicians.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Orhan |first=Yunus Emre |title=The relationship between affective polarization and democratic backsliding: comparative evidence |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2021.2008912 |journal=Democratization |volume=29 |issue=4 |pages=714–735 |doi=10.1080/13510347.2021.2008912 |s2cid=248304434 |issn=1351-0347}}</ref>

== Prevalence and trends==
{{see also|Democratic backsliding by country}}
[[File:Countries democratizing or autocratizing substantially and significantly 2010–2020.svg|thumb|upright=1.35|Countries autocratizing (red) or [[democratizing]] (blue) substantially and significantly (2010–2020), according to the [[V-Dem Democracy indices]]. Countries in grey are substantially unchanged.<ref>Nazifa Alizada, Rowan Cole, Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Sebastian Hellmeier, Palina Kolvani, Jean Lachapelle, Anna Lührmann, Seraphine F. Maerz, Shreeya Pillai, and Staffan I. Lindberg. 2021. Autocratization Turns Viral. Democracy Report 2021. University of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute. https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/74/8c/748c68ad-f224-4cd7-87f9-8794add5c60f/dr_2021_updated.pdf {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210914030243/https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/74/8c/748c68ad-f224-4cd7-87f9-8794add5c60f/dr_2021_updated.pdf }}</ref>]]
A study by the [[V-Dem Democracy indices]] by the V-Dem Institute at the [[University of Gothenburg]], which contains more than eighteen-million data points relevant to democracy, measuring 350 highly specific indicators across 174 countries as of the end of 2016, found that the number of democracies in the world modestly declined from 100 in 2011 to 97 in 2017; some countries moved toward democracy, while other countries moved away from democracy.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mechkova|first1=Valeriya|last2=Lührmann|first2=Anna|last3=Lindberg|first3=Staffan I.|s2cid=158736288|title=How Much Democratic Backsliding?|journal=Journal of Democracy|language=en|volume=28|issue=4|pages=162–169|doi=10.1353/jod.2017.0075|issn=1086-3214}}</ref> V-Dem's 2019 Annual Democracy Report found that the trend of autocratization continued, while "24 countries are now severely affected by what is established as a 'third wave of autocratization'" including "populous countries such as Brazil, Bangladesh and the United States, as well as several Eastern European countries" (specifically Bulgaria and Serbia).<ref name=2019VDem/> The report found that an increasing proportion of the world population lived in countries undergoing autocratization (2.3 billion in 2018).<ref name=2019VDem/> The report found that while the majority of countries were democracies, the number of liberal democracies declined to 39 by 2018 (down from 44 a decade earlier).<ref name=2019VDem/> The research group [[Freedom House]], in reports in 2017 and 2019, identified democratic backsliding in a variety of regions across the world.<ref name=":5">{{Cite report|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2019/democracy-in-retreat|title=Democracy in Retreat|publisher=Freedom House|access-date=17 May 2019|archive-date=15 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190215005216/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2019/democracy-in-retreat|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|author=Esther King|url=http://www.politico.eu/article/democratic-backsliding-threatens-international-order-report/|title=Democratic backsliding threatens international order|work=Politico|access-date=23 June 2017|archive-date=29 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729092311/http://www.politico.eu/article/democratic-backsliding-threatens-international-order-report/|url-status=live}}</ref> Freedom House's 2019 ''[[Freedom in the World]]'' report, titled ''Democracy in Retreat'', showed freedom of expression declining each year over the preceding 13 years, with sharper drops since 2012.<ref>{{Cite report|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2019/democracy-in-retreat|title=Democracy in Retreat: Freedom in the World 2019|year=2020|publisher=Freedom House|access-date=17 May 2019|archive-date=15 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190215005216/https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2019/democracy-in-retreat|url-status=live}}</ref>
[[File:BTI 2022 DEM.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35| Global trend report [[Bertelsmann Transformation Index]] 2022 <ref name="BTI 2022a">{{cite web | title=Global Dashboard | website=BTI 2022 | url=https://bti-project.org/en/reports/global-dashboard?&cb=00000 | access-date=Apr 17, 2023 | archive-date=17 April 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230417052038/https://bti-project.org/en/reports/global-dashboard?&cb=00000 | url-status=live }}</ref>]]
Scholarly work in the 2010s detailed democratic backsliding, in various forms and to various extents, in [[Hungary]] and [[Poland]],<ref name="Cianetti">{{Cite journal|title=Rethinking "democratic backsliding" in Central and Eastern Europe – looking beyond Hungary and Poland |author=Licia Cianetti |author2=James Dawson |author3=Seán Hanley |journal=East European Politics|volume=34|issue=3|pages=243–256|quote=Over the past decade, a scholarly consensus has emerged that that democracy in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) is deteriorating, a trend often subsumed under the label 'backsliding'. ... the new dynamics of backsliding are best illustrated by the one-time democratic front-runners Hungary and Poland.|doi=10.1080/21599165.2018.1491401|doi-access=free}}</ref> the [[Czech Republic]],<ref name=Hanley>{{Cite journal|author=Seán Hanley & Milada Anna Vachudova|title=Understanding the illiberal turn: democratic backsliding in the Czech Republic|journal=East European Politics|volume=34|issue=3|pages=276–296|doi=10.1080/21599165.2018.1493457|doi-access=free}}</ref> [[Turkey]],<ref name=Tansel>{{Cite journal|author=Cemal Burak Tansel|title=Authoritarian Neoliberalism and Democratic Backsliding in Turkey: Beyond the Narratives of Progress|volume=23|issue=2|journal=South European Society and Politics|pages=197–217|doi=10.1080/13608746.2018.1479945|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=AkyuzHess>{{Cite journal|author=Kadir Akyuz & Steve Hess|s2cid=158084228|title=Turkey Looks East: International Leverage and Democratic Backsliding in a Hybrid Regime|journal=Mediterranean Quarterly|volume=29|issue=2|pages=1–26|doi=10.1215/10474552-6898075}}</ref> [[Brazil]], [[Venezuela]],<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal|title=Opposition at the Margins: Strategies against the Erosion of Democracy in Colombia and Venezuela|author=Laura Gamboa|s2cid=157426820|journal=Comparative Politics|volume=49|issue=4|pages=457–477|doi = 10.5129/001041517821273044}}</ref><ref name="Sabatini">{{cite news|url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/venezuela/2016-11-01/final-blow-venezuelas-democracy|title=The Final Blow to Venezuela's Democracy: What Latin America Can Do About It|last=Sabatini|first=Christopher|work=[[Foreign Affairs]]|language=en-US|issn=0015-7120|access-date=27 May 2019|archive-date=25 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210225184836/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/venezuela/2016-11-01/final-blow-venezuelas-democracy|url-status=live}}</ref> and [[India]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.democratic-erosion.com/2021/02/05/democratic-erosion-in-india-a-case-study/|title=Democratic Erosion in India: A Case Study|website=www.democratic-erosion.com|access-date=14 March 2021|archive-date=17 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210317155809/https://www.democratic-erosion.com/2021/02/05/democratic-erosion-in-india-a-case-study/|url-status=live}}</ref> The scholarly recognition of the concept of democratic backsliding reflects a reversal from older views, which held "that democracy, once attained in a fairly wealthy state, would become a permanent fixture."<ref name="DemDigest"/> This older view came to be realized as erroneous beginning in the mid-2000s, as multiple scholars acknowledged that some seemingly-stable democracies have recently faced a decline in the quality of their democracy.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last1=Huq|first1=Aziz|last2=Ginsburg|first2=Tom|title=How to Lose a Constitutional Democracy|url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/uclalr65&div=5|journal=UCLA Law Review|volume=65|pages=78–169|access-date=15 May 2023|archive-date=15 May 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230515200309/https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/uclalr65&div=5|url-status=live}}</ref> Huq and Ginsburg identified in an academic paper "37 instances in 25 different countries in the postwar period in which democratic quality declined significantly (though a fully [[authoritarian]] regime didn't emerge)", including countries that were "seemingly stable, reasonably wealthy" democracies.<ref name="HuqGinsburgVox"/>

The 2020 report of the Varieties of Democracy Institute found that the global share of democracies declined from 54% in 2009 to 49% in 2019, and that a greater share of the global population lived in autocratizing countries (6% in 2009, 34% in 2019).<ref name=VDem2020>''[https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/f0/5d/f05d46d8-626f-4b20-8e4e-53d4b134bfcb/democracy_report_2020_low.pdf Autocratization Surges–Resistance Grows: Democracy Report 2020] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200330123413/https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/f0/5d/f05d46d8-626f-4b20-8e4e-53d4b134bfcb/democracy_report_2020_low.pdf }}'', V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg (March 2020).</ref> The 10 countries with the highest degree of democratizing from 2009 to 2019 were [[Tunisia]], [[Armenia]], [[The Gambia]], [[Sri Lanka]], [[Madagascar]], [[Myanmar]], [[Fiji]], [[Kyrgyzstan]], [[Ecuador]], and [[Niger]]; the 10 countries with the highest degree of autocratizing from 2009 to 2019 were [[Hungary]], [[Turkey]], [[Poland]], [[Serbia]], [[Brazil]], [[Bangladesh]], [[Mali]], [[Thailand]], [[Nicaragua]], and [[Zambia]].<ref name=VDem2020/> However, the institute found that signs of hope in an "unprecedented degree of mobilization for democracy" as reflected in increases in pro-democracy mass mobilization; the proportion of countries with "substantial pro-democracy mass protests" increased to 44% in 2019 (from 27% in 2009).<ref name=VDem2020/> According to a 2020 study, "Democratic backsliding does not necessarily see all democratic institutions erode in parallel fashion... we establish that elections are improving and rights are retracting in the same time period, and in many of the same cases."<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Ding|first1=Iza|last2=Slater|first2=Dan|title=Democratic decoupling|journal=Democratization|volume=28|pages=63–80|doi=10.1080/13510347.2020.1842361|issn=1351-0347|doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Central and Eastern Europe ===
{{See also|Democratic backsliding under Viktor Orbán}}
In the 2010s, a scholarly consensus developed that the [[Central and Eastern Europe]] region was experiencing democratic backsliding, most prominently in [[Hungary]] and [[Poland]],<ref name="Cianetti" /> and the [[European Union]] (EU) failed to prevent democratic backsliding in some of its other [[European Union member states|member states]].<ref name=":10">{{Cite journal|last=Kelemen|first=R. Daniel|title=The European Union's Authoritarian Equilibrium|language=en|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13501763.2020.1712455?journalCode=rjpp20|volume=20|journal=Journal of European Public Policy|issue=3|pages=481–499|doi=10.1080/13501763.2020.1712455|s2cid=221055795|access-date=25 August 2020|archive-date=29 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201129184117/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13501763.2020.1712455?journalCode=rjpp20|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Kelemen|first=R. Daniel|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/02/eu-is-supposed-promote-democracy-so-why-do-anti-democratic-politicians-thrive-within-it/|newspaper=Washington Post|title=The E.U. is supposed to promote democracy. So why do anti-democratic politicians thrive within it?|access-date=25 August 2020|archive-date=2 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210302014859/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/02/eu-is-supposed-promote-democracy-so-why-do-anti-democratic-politicians-thrive-within-it/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Rutgers University]] political scientist [[R. Daniel Kelemen]] argues that EU membership has enabled an "authoritarian equilibrium" and may even make it easier for authoritarian-minded leaders to erode democracy due to the EU's system of party politics, a reluctance to interfere in domestic political matters; appropriation of EU funds by backsliding regimes; and [[Freedom of movement for workers in the European Union|free movement]] for dissatisfied citizens, which allows citizens to leave backsliding regimes and deplete the opposition while strengthening the regimes.<ref name=":10" /> According to Dalia Research's 2020 poll, only 38 percent of Polish citizens and 36 percent of Hungarian citizens believe that their countries are democratic, while the rest say they would like their countries to be more democratic.<ref>{{cite news |title=Most Poles, Hungarians don't think their countries are democratic: poll |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/minorities-in-poland-hungary-think-their-countries-are-democratic-report/ |access-date=4 November 2020 |work=Politico |archive-date=17 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210317161215/https://www.politico.eu/article/minorities-in-poland-hungary-think-their-countries-are-democratic-report/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== United States ===
{{Excerpt|Democratic backsliding in the United States}}

==Effects of judicial independence==
A 2011 study examined the effects of [[judicial independence]] in preventing democratic backsliding. The study, which analyzed 163 nations from 1960 to 2000, concluded that established independent judiciaries are successful at preventing democracies from drifting to authoritarianism, but that states with newly formed courts "are positively associated with regime collapses in both democracies and nondemocracies".<ref>{{cite journal |author=Douglas M. Gibler |author2=Kirk A. Randazzo |title=Testing the Effects of Independent Judiciaries on the Likelihood of Democratic Backsliding|journal=American Journal of Political Science|volume=55|issue=3|pages=696–709|jstor=23024945|doi=10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00504.x}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Totalitarianism]]

==References==
{{notelist}}
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
{{Refbegin}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Andersen |first1=David |title=Comparative Democratization and Democratic Backsliding: The Case for a Historical-Institutional Approach |journal=Comparative Politics |volume=51 |issue=4 |pages=645–663 |doi=10.5129/001041519X15647434970117 |jstor=26663952 |s2cid=201373568 }}
*{{cite book |last1=Bieber |first1=Florian|author-link=Florian Bieber |title=The Rise of Authoritarianism in the Western Balkans |publisher=Springer Nature |isbn=978-3-030-22149-2 |language=en}}
*{{cite book |last1=Cheeseman |first1=Nic |author-link1=Nic Cheeseman |first2=Brian |last2=Klaas |title=How to Rig an Election |location=New Haven |isbn=978-0-300-20443-8 }}
*{{cite journal |last1=Daly |first1=Tom Gerald |title=Democratic Decay: Conceptualising an Emerging Research Field |journal=Hague Journal on the Rule of Law |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=9–36 |doi=10.1007/s40803-019-00086-2|s2cid=159354232 }}
* {{Cite book |last1=Geddes |first1=Barbara |title=How Dictatorships Work |last2=Wright |first2=Joseph |last3=Frantz |first3=Erica |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2018 |isbn=9781107115828}}
*{{cite book |last1=Haggard |first1=Stephan |last2=Kaufman |first2=Robert |title=Backsliding: Democratic Regress in the Contemporary World |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-95840-0 |language=en}}
*{{cite journal |first1=Roberto Stefan |last1=Foa |first2=Yascha |last2=Mounk |author-link2=Yascha Mounk |url=https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/danger-deconsolidation-democratic-disconnect |title=The Danger of Deconsolidation: The Democratic Disconnect |journal=[[Journal of Democracy]] |volume=27 |issue=3 |year=2016 |pages=5–17 |doi=10.1353/jod.2016.0049 |s2cid=156622248 |access-date=25 June 2018 |archive-date=11 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190311093027/https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/danger-deconsolidation-democratic-disconnect |url-status=live }}
*{{cite book |title=Liberalism and Its Discontents |author-link=Francis Fukuyama|first=Francis |last=Fukuyama |publisher=Farrar, Straus and Giroux |year=2022 |isbn=978-0374606718}}
*Jee, Haemin; Lueders, Hans; Myrick, Rachel (2021). "[[doi:10.1080/13510347.2021.2010709|Towards a unified approach to research on democratic backsliding]]". ''Democratization''
*{{cite book |last1=Klaas |first1=Brian |title=Despot's Accomplice: How the West is Aiding and Abetting the Decline of Democracy |publisher=Hurst Publishers |isbn=978-1-84904-930-6}}
*{{cite book |last1=Levitsky |first1=Steven |last2=Ziblatt |first2=Daniel |author1-link=Steven Levitsky |author2-link=Daniel Ziblatt |title=[[How Democracies Die]] |publisher=Crown |location=New York |isbn=978-1-5247-6293-3}}
*{{cite book |last1=Levitsky |first1=Steven |last2=Way |first2=Lucan A. |title=Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War |doi=10.1017/CBO9780511781353|isbn=9780511781353 }}
*Przeworski, Adam. 2019. ''Crises of Democracy''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
*{{cite book |last1=Qvortrup |first1=Matt |title=Death by a Thousand Cuts: The Slow Demise of Democracy |publisher=De Gruyter |isbn=978-3-11-071332-9 |language=en}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Waldner |first1=David |last2=Lust |first2=Ellen |title=Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding |journal=Annual Review of Political Science |volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=93–113 |doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-050517-114628|doi-access=free }}
*{{cite journal | last=Sönmez | first=Hakan | title=Democratic Backsliding or Stabilization? | journal=Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science | publisher=International Association for Political Science Students | volume=46 | date=2020-09-30 | issn=2414-6633 | doi=10.22151/politikon.46.3 | pages=54–78| s2cid=224846248 }}
{{refend}}

==External links==
* ''[https://www.democratic-erosion.com Democratic Erosion],'' a site prepared by a consortium of universities

[[Category:Democratic backsliding| ]]
[[Category:Authoritarianism]]
[[Category:Democracy]]
[[Category:Human rights concepts]]
[[Category:Political science terminology]]
[[Category:Populism]]

Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal

2022-08-29T17:07:07Z

BritneyMcKillop: Just published a comprehensive article.

{{Distinguish|text=[[Rastriya Prajatantra Party]], a center-right constitutional monarchist party under the chairmanship of [[Rajendra Lingden]]}}
{{Infobox political party
| name = Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal
| logo =
| logo_size = 150px
| colorcode = orange
| colours = {{colour box|{{party color|Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal}}}}
| chairman = [[Kamal Thapa]]
| foundation = October 2006 
| ideology = [[Hindu nationalism]] [[Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava]] [[Conservatism]] [[Economic liberalism]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ekantipur.com/2013/08/12/interview/nepali-people-never-launched-a-revolution-to-remove-monarchy/376298.html |title=Nepali people never launched a revolution to remove monarchy |publisher=ekantipur |access-date=1 September 2013 |archive-date=15 August 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130815092257/http://www.ekantipur.com/2013/08/12/interview/nepali-people-never-launched-a-revolution-to-remove-monarchy/376298.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>
| split = [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party]]
| merged =
| headquarters = [[Kathmandu]]
| international =
| website = [http://www.rppn.org.np www.rppn.org.np]
| country = Nepal
| native_name = {{lang|ne|राष्ट्रिय प्रजातन्त्र पार्टी नेपाल}}
| dissolution =
| predecessor =
| student_wing = National Democratic Student Organisation, Nepal
| youth_wing = National Democratic Youth Organisation, Nepal
| womens_wing = National Democratic Women Organisation Nepal
| wing1_title = Labour
| wing1 = National Democratic Trade union confederation
| position = [[Right-wing]]
| symbol = [[File:Logo RPP, Nepal.png|100px]]
}}
'''Rastriya Prajatantra Party, Nepal''' ({{lang-ne|राष्ट्रिय प्रजातन्त्र पार्टी नेपाल}}; [[translation]]: ''National Democratic Party Nepal'') is a [[Hinduism|Hindu]] [[right-wing]], [[Cultural conservatism|cultural conservative]] party. It previously existed as [[Monarchism|royalist]] [[List of political parties in Nepal|political party in Nepal]] from 2006 to 2016.<ref>[http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900sid/LSGZ-747CN9?OpenDocument Situation Reports: Nepal, OCHA Nepal Situation Overview - Jun 2007]</ref> The party was formed as a splinter of [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party]] in 2006 and was later reunified in 2016.<ref>{{Cite web|title=RPP, RPP-N formally unite as Rastriya Prajatantra Party|url=https://kathmandupost.com/valley/2016/11/21/rpp-rpp-n-unite|access-date=5 December 2020|website=kathmandupost.com|language=en|publication-place=Kathmandu}}</ref> The party was reformed in 2022 by [[Kamal Thapa]].

The party supported the restoration of the [[Hinduism|Hindu]] kingdom in Nepal under the [[Shah dynasty]].<ref>[http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2007/jun/jun19/news13.php Nepalnews.com Mercantile Communications Pvt. Ltd]{{dead link|bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> Presently, the party advocates only [[Hindu nationalism]].<ref name=":0" />

The party was registered with the [[Election Commission of Nepal]] ahead of the [[2008 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election|April 2008 Constituent Assembly election]] for the first time.<ref>[http://www.election.gov.np/NP/legal/list.php पार्टीको सूची — Election Commission of Nepal] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131102124711/http://www.election.gov.np/NP/legal/list.php }}</ref> Ahead of the election, the party sought to form a front of royalist parties.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=136515 |title=eKantipur.com - Nepal's No.1 News Portal |access-date=2008-02-07 |archive-date=2008-04-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080401092059/http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=136515 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In the [[2013 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election|2013 elections]], the party had emerged as the fourth largest party in the [[2nd Nepalese Constituent Assembly|Constituent Assembly]] winning 24 out of 575 seats.

==History==

=== Founding, 2006–2008 ===
It was started as a breakaway faction of the [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party]] under leadership of [[Kamal Thapa]], home minister under [[King Gyanendra]]'s direct rule. Thapa resigned as party chair in October 2006.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=89698 |title=eKantipur.com - Nepal's No.1 News Portal |access-date=2008-02-07 |archive-date=2008-04-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080401092053/http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=89698 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

RPP won the largest number of mayors in the 2006 municipal election. Rajaram Shrestha won in the capital [[Kathmandu]]; also Khadga Prasad Palungua in [[Dharan, Nepal|Dharan]], Pralhad Prasad Shah Haluwai in [[Biratnagar]], Ram Shankar Shah in [[Jaleswor]], Sumitra Madhinne in [[Bhaktapur]], Madhukar Prasad Adhikari in [[Hetauda]], Bimal Prasad Shrivastav in [[Birgunj]], Bidur Khadka in [[Baglung]] and Bhimsen Thapa in [[Pokhara]]. However this election was boycotted by most major parties.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2006/feb/feb10/news01.php |title=Nepalnews.com Mercantile Communications Pvt. Ltd |access-date=2008-02-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080516215424/http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2006/feb/feb10/news01.php |archive-date=2008-05-16 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In April 2006, the [[Nepal Samata Party (Socialist)]] merged into the party.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2006/apr/apr05/news12.php |title=Nepalnews.com Mercantile Communications Pvt. Ltd |access-date=2008-02-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080516230235/http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2006/apr/apr05/news12.php |archive-date=2008-05-16 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In January 2007 the splinter group [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party (Nationalist)]] of [[Rajeshwor Devkota|Rajeswor Devkota]] rejoined the party. Bidwai Parishad of Jit Bahadur Arjel also merged with them<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20180719113714/http://www.ipcs.org/Feb_07_SAnepal.pdf Microsoft Word - Feb_07_SAnepal.doc]</ref>

On March 2, 2008, [[Rabindra Nath Sharma]] stepped down as party chairman, citing health reasons. [[Kamal Thapa]] again became chairman.<ref name="march">[http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/mar/mar02/news17.php "Sharma resigns as RPP-N chief; Thapa takes over"]{{Dead link|bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, Nepalnews, March 2, 2008.</ref>

=== Constituent Assembly, 2008–2015 ===
The party won four seats in the [[2008 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election|2008 Constituent Assembly election]]. At the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly on May 28, 2008, the party was the only party to oppose the declaration of a republic; there were 560 votes in favor of a republic and only the party's four votes against.<ref>[http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/may/may29/news01.php "RPP-Nepal becomes the only party against republic; some lawyers question procedures adopted by CA"]{{dead link|bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, Nepalnews, May 29, 2008.</ref> Thapa subsequently said on June 20, 2008 that the country faced an impending "disaster", urging alertness among the party. He said that the party's policies and programmes would remain the same despite the political change.<ref>[http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/jun/jun21/news01.php "Thapa predicts disaster soon"]{{Dead link|bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, Nepalnews, June 21, 2008.</ref> On July 13, 2008, he described the abolition of the monarchy as merely "an interim decision", saying that the party sought the restoration of the monarchy.<ref>[http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/jul/jul14/news03.php "Thapa hopes for revival of monarchy"]{{Dead link|bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, Nepalnews, July 14, 2008.</ref>

The party boycotted the [[2008 Nepalese presidential election|July 2008 presidential election]] in the Constituent Assembly, on the grounds that the major parties were treating the election as a partisan contest.<ref>[http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/jul/jul18/news10.php "RPP-Nepal to boycott the presidential election"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081012043418/http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/jul/jul18/news10.php }}, Nepalnews, July 18, 2008.</ref>

In August 2008 some senior leaders, including [[Rabindra Nath Sharma]] and [[Rajeshwor Devkota]], left the party and joined the [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/aug/aug21/news06.php |title=Archived copy |website=www.nepalnews.com |access-date=22 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081122023055/http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/aug/aug21/news06.php |archive-date=22 November 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

The party won 24 seats under proportional representation in the [[2013 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election|2013 Constituent Assembly elections]] making it the fourth largest party in the [[2nd Nepalese Constituent Assembly|house]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Final Results of PR Vote Count|url=http://election.gov.np/CA2070/CAResults/reportBody.php?selectedMenu1=2&rand=1388399954|work=Election Commission of Nepal}}</ref> The party split following differences over naming candidates to the proportional representation seats won by the party. Central leaders of the party including former minister Tanka Dhakal and former Kathmandu mayoral candidate Rajaram Shrestha registered a new party the 'Nepali Rastriya Prajatantra Party' at the [[Election Commission of Nepal|Election Commission]] on 30 December 2013.<ref>{{cite news|title=RPP-N splits over PR list candidates|url=http://www.ekantipur.com/2013/12/30/top-story/rpp-n-splits-over-pr-list-candidates/383162.html|access-date=30 December 2013|newspaper=eKantipur|archive-date=1 January 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140101003942/http://www.ekantipur.com/2013/12/30/top-story/rpp-n-splits-over-pr-list-candidates/383162.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> However, the Election Commission turned down the breakaway group's request seeking recognition as a new party and claim of [[proportional representation]] seats.<ref>{{cite news|last=Sharma|first=Bhadra|title=EC turns down RPP-N faction's pleas|url=http://www.ekantipur.com/2014/01/01/top-story/ec-turns-down-rpp-n-factions-pleas/383226.html|access-date=3 January 2014|newspaper=eKantipur|archive-date=13 December 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141213200322/http://www.ekantipur.com/2014/01/01/top-story/ec-turns-down-rpp-n-factions-pleas/383226.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> Tanka Dhakal later announced his return to the party stating "Splitting the party at this moment is not in our interest. It will weaken democracy" <ref>{{cite news|title=RPP-N rebel faction backtracks|url=http://english.setopati.com/politics/61/RPP-N-rebel-faction-backtracks/|access-date=3 January 2014|newspaper=Setopati|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140103231410/http://english.setopati.com/politics/61/RPP-N-rebel-faction-backtracks/|archive-date=3 January 2014|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref> Other dissidents leaders said it was Chairman Kamal Thapa's "concession on monarchy and Hindu state" that precipitated the split.<ref>{{cite news|title='Thapa's concession on monarchy, Hindu state caused RPP-N split'|url=http://www.ekantipur.com/2014/01/13/capital/thapas-concession-on-monarchy-hindu-state-caused-rpp-n-split/383808.html|access-date=13 January 2014|newspaper=The Kathmandu Post}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Maila Baje|title=Crowning Touches Of Exasperation|url=http://www.ekantipur.com/2014/01/13/capital/thapas-concession-on-monarchy-hindu-state-caused-rpp-n-split/383808.html|work=Nepali Netbook|access-date=13 January 2014}}"A deeper reason for the crisis is considered to be Thapa’s perceived post-election dilution of the party’s avowed agenda of restoring the monarchy."</ref>

=== Unification, 2015–2016 ===
{{multiple image
|width1=150
|header=
|image1=Rppnepalflagnewversion.png
|alt1=
|caption1=Party flag prior to unification
|width2=150
|image2=Rastriya_Prajatantra_Party_Nepal-electionsymbol2064.jpg
|alt2=
|caption2=Party election symbol prior to unification
}}
When the party joined the government of [[Khadga Prasad Oli]], Bikram Bahadur Thapa and Kunti Devi Shahi became state ministers.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/ampnews/2015-11-09/pm-oli-expands-cabinet.html|title = PM Oli expands Cabinet}}</ref>

On 21 November 2016, Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal and [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party|Rastriya Prajtantra Party]] announced their unification. The new party retained the name of [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party]]. The new party had a total strength of 37 in the [[Parliament of Nepal]] becoming the fourth largest party.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://thehimalayantimes.com/nepal/rastriya-prajatantra-party-merges-with-rastriya-prajatantra-party-nepal/|title=You are being redirected...|website=thehimalayantimes.com|access-date=2017-06-26}}</ref> Kamal Thapa was elected chairman of the party in a special general convention in Kathmandu in February 2017.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2017-02-20/kamal-thapa-reelected-as-rpp-chairman.html|title=Kamal Thapa reelected as RPP chairman|access-date=2017-06-26|language=en}}</ref>

=== Revival, 2022-present ===
On 13 February 2022, [[Kamal Thapa]] who had prior made a declaration of leaving [[Rastriya Prajatantra Party]] made a press release about joining the Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal soon as the national president of the party.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=Setopati|first=सेतोपाटी संवाददाता |title=राप्रपा नेपालको अध्यक्ष भएपछि कमल थापाले भने- अलमलपछि फेरि आफ्नो घर फर्किएँ|url=https://www.setopati.com/politics/262106/|access-date=2022-02-13|website=Setopati|language=hi}}</ref> After the revival, the party left the agenda of Constitutional monarchy which the party had taken as its ideology for a long period. The main agenda of the new party remains [[Hindu nationalism]] or [[Hindutva]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=कमल थापाले ब्यूँताए राप्रपा नेपाल, फागुन ७ मा घोषणा गर्ने|url=https://www.onlinekhabar.com/2022/02/1078321|access-date=2022-02-13|website=Online Khabar|language=en-US}}</ref>

On 21 July 2022, Former [[Ministry of Urban Development (Nepal)|Urban Development Minister]] Dil Nath Giri, Former RPP Vice-President Dil Bikash Rajbhandari along with leaders Shyam Timalsina, Keshavraj Shrestha, Daman Basnet, Sudha Joshi, Ranjita Shrestha and Dipesh Khatri resigned en masse from RPP and joined hands with Kamal Thapa in a welcome program in Kathmandu.<ref>{{Cite web |last=रातोपाटी |title=पूर्वमन्त्री गिरिलगायत राप्रपा नेपाल प्रवेश |url=https://ratopati.com/story/253008/2022/7/21/dilanath-giri |access-date=2022-07-22 |website=RatoPati |language=Nepali}}</ref>

== Electoral performance ==
{| class="wikitable sortable mw-collapsible"
!Election
!Leader
! colspan="2" |Votes
!Seats
!Position
!Resulting government
|-
|[[2008 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election|2008]]
|[[Kamal Thapa]]
|110,519
|1.03
| style="text-align:center;" |{{Infobox political party/seats|4|575|orange}}
|12th
|{{no2|[[Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre)|CPN (Maoist)]]–CPN (UML)–[[Madhesi Jana Adhikar Forum, Nepal|MJFN]]}}
|-
|[[2013 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election|2013]]
|[[Kamal Thapa]]
|630,697
|6.66
| style="text-align:center;" |{{Infobox political party/seats|24|575|orange}}
|4th
|{{no2|Congress–CPN (UML)–[[Rastriya Prajatantra Party|RPP]]}}
|}

==References==
{{Reflist}}
{{Hindu Nationalism}}
{{Political parties in Nepal}}

[[Category:Nepalese Hindu political parties]]
[[Category:Hindu nationalism in Nepal]]
[[Category:2022 establishments in Nepal]]
[[Category:Political parties disestablished in 2016]]
[[Category:Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal politicians| ]]
[[Category:Right-wing parties]]
[[Category:2016 disestablishments in Nepal]]

Neoliberal

2022-08-24T22:42:27Z

BritneyMcKillop: Formulated a new article outline.

#REDIRECT [[Neoliberalism]]

{{redirect category shell|{{R from adjective}}}}

Samadhi of Ranjit Singh

2022-07-02T19:46:51Z

BritneyMcKillop: Created an informative guide.

{{short description|Building in Lahore, Pakistan}}
{{More citations needed}}
{{Infobox Monument
|monument_name = Samadhi of 'Sher-e-Punjab' Maharaja Ranjit Singh
|native_name = '''ਰਣਜੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੀ ਸਮਾਧੀ''' {{Nastaliq|رنجیت سنگھ دی سمادھی}}
|image = File:Tomb of Ranjit Singh, Lahore.jpg
|caption = The Samadhi was built next to [[Badshahi Mosque]] and [[Gurdwara Dera Sahib]].
|location = [[Lahore]], Punjab {{flag|Pakistan}}
|designer =
|type =
|length =
|width =
|begin =
|complete = 1848
|open =
|dedicated_to =
|map_image =
|map_caption =
|map_width =
|coordinates =
|lat =
|long =
|extra =
}}

The '''Samadhi of Ranjit Singh''' ({{lang-pa|{{nq|رنجیت سنگھ دی سمادھی}}}} {{small|([[Shahmukhi]])}}, ਰਣਜੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੀ ਸਮਾਧੀ {{small|([[Gurmukhi]])}}; {{Lang-ur|{{nq|رنجیت سنگھ کی سمادھی}}}}) is a 19th-century building in [[Lahore]], Pakistan that houses the [[Urn|funerary urns]] of the [[Sikh empire|Sikh Maharaja]] [[Ranjit Singh]] (1780 – 1839). It is located adjacent the [[Lahore Fort]] and [[Badshahi Mosque]], as well as the [[Gurdwara Dera Sahib]], which marks the spot where the fifth guru of Sikhism, [[Guru Arjan Dev]], died. Its construction was started by his son and successor, [[Maharaja Kharak Singh]], after the ruler's death in 1839, and completed nine years later. It overlooks the [[Hazuri Bagh]], built by Ranjit Singh, to its south.

==History==
[[File:Badshahi Mosque (King’s Mosque) by ZILL NIAZI 2.jpg|thumb|The shrine was built at the northeast corner of the [[Badshahi Mosque]].]]
Construction of the building was started by his son, [[Kharak Singh]] on the spot where he was [[cremation|cremated]], and was completed by his youngest son, [[Duleep Singh]] in 1848.

===Modern era===
The funerary urns were removed from the marble pavilion and were replaced by a simple slab around 1999.{{Citation needed}} This was done as part of the preparations for the [[Khalsa]] Tricentenary and the visit of Sikh dignitaries from India. It has been kept well by [[Government of Pakistan|Pakistani government]]. The Samadhi was damaged by an [[2005 Kashmir earthquake|earthquake]] in 2005 but was repaired soon.

==Architecture==
[[Image:SORS1.jpg|right|thumb|The [[samadhi]] combines Hindu, Islamic, and Sikh motifs.]]

===Building===
The building combines elements of [[Sikh architecture|Sikh]], [[Hindu architecture|Hindu]], and [[Islamic architecture]].<ref>[http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2016/01/16/features/samadhi-of-ranjit-singh-a-sight-of-religious-harmony/ Samadhi of Ranjit Singh – a sight of religious harmony, Pakistan Today. JANUARY 16, 2016, NADEEM DAR]</ref> Portions of the building are believed to have been plundered from the adjacent Lahore Fort.<ref>[http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2016/01/16/features/samadhi-of-ranjit-singh-a-sight-of-religious-harmony/ Samadhi of Ranjit Singh – a sight of religious harmony, Pakistan Today. JANUARY 16, 2016, NADEEM DAR]</ref>

The building has gilded fluted domes and [[cupola]]s, and an ornate [[balustrade]] around the upper portion of the building. The front of the doorway has images of [[Ganesh]], [[Devi]] and [[Brahma]] that are cut from red sandstone. The dome is decorated with [[Nāga]] (serpent) hood designs - the product of Hindu craftsmen that worked on the project.<ref>[http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2016/01/16/features/samadhi-of-ranjit-singh-a-sight-of-religious-harmony/ Samadhi of Ranjit Singh – a sight of religious harmony, Pakistan Today. JANUARY 16, 2016, NADEEM DAR]</ref> The wooden panels on the ceiling are decorated with stained glass work, while the walls are richly decorated with floral designs. The ceilings are decorated with glass mosaic work.

===Funerary urns===
[[Ranjit Singh]]'s ashes are contained in a marble [[urn]] in the shape of a [[Indian lotus|lotus]], sheltered under a marble pavilion inlaid with [[pietra dura]], in the centre of the tomb. Surrounding him, in smaller urns, are the ashes of four [[Hindu]] [[sati (practice)|sati]] queens and seven concubines.<ref>[http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/sunday-special/kaleidoscope/-sati-choice-before-maharaja-ranjit-s-ranis/99411.html 'Sati' choice before Maharaja Ranjit's Ranis, Kanwarjit Singh Kang, Jun 28, 2015]</ref>

==Associated monuments==
[[File:Gurdwara Dera Sahib and Samadhi of Ranjit Singh.jpg|thumb|The [[Gurdwara Dera Sahib]] is adjacent to the samadhi, and commemorates the spot where Guru Arjan Dev Ji died.]]
Two small monuments to the west of the main building commemorate Maharaja Ranjit Singh's son Maharaja Kharak Singh and grandson [[Nau Nihal Singh]], along with their wives. The building is located adjacent to [[Gurdwara Dera Sahib]], the place where martyrdom of [[Guru Arjun]] took place.

==Gallery==
<gallery>
File:Samadhi of Ranjit Singh & Sikh Temple -Damn Cruze.png
File:"Samadhi of Ranjit Singh at Sunrise.".jpg
File:Shrine_of_ranjit_singh.jpg|Samadhi of Ranjit Singh in 2015
File:Samadhi Ranjit Singh circa 1860.jpg|The Samadhi of Emperor Ranjit Singh in 1880s.
File:Samadhi Ranjeet Singh.jpg|A view of the Samadhi.
File:Samadhi Ranjit Singh.jpg|Samadhi Ranjit Singh
File:Samadhi of Ranjit Singh 123.jpg
</gallery>

==See also==
{{div col|colwidth=22em}}
*[[Ranjit Singh]]
*[[Sikh Empire]]
* [[Evacuee Trust Property Board]]
*[[List of mausolea]]
*[[Walled City of Lahore]]
{{col div end}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.web.virginia.edu/asianarc/public/lahore/badshahi04.jpg A photo of the tomb]
*[http://www.harappa.com/hawkshaw/41.html An older photo of the samadhi]
*[http://www.punjabheritage.org The Latest News on the Heritage of the Punjab]

{{Sikhism}}
{{Walled City of Lahore}}
{{Lahore}}

{{coord|31.5893|74.3113|type:landmark_region:PK|display=title}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Samadhi Of Ranjit Singh}}
[[Category:Architecture of Lahore]]
[[Category:Buildings and structures in Lahore]]
[[Category:Sikh Empire]]
[[Category:Sikh architecture]]
[[Category:Sikhism in Lahore]]
[[Category:Walled City of Lahore]]
[[Category:Tourist attractions in Lahore]]
[[Category:Shrines in Lahore]]
[[Category:Samadhis]]
[[Category:Sikh places]]
[[Category:Ranjit Singh]]

Godhra train burning

2022-04-30T01:31:47Z

BritneyMcKillop: Finished writing a new contribution.

{{Short description|2002 rail transport fire near Godhra Station, Gujarat, India}}
{{Use Indian English}}
{{Use dmy dates}}
{{Infobox civilian attack
| title = Godhra train burning
| partof =
| image =
| image_size =
| alt =
| caption =
| map =
| map_size =
| map_alt =
| map_caption =
| location = [[Godhra]], [[Gujarat]], India
| target = [[Hindu]] [[Karsevaks]] returning from [[Ayodhya]]
| coordinates = {{coord|22|46|41|N|73|35|52|E|region:IN|display=inline,title}}
| date = 27 February 2002
| time = 7:43 a.m.
| fatalities = 59
| injuries = 48
| weapons = [[Petrol bombs]], [[stones]], [[wikt:stick|stick]]s
}}
{{Violence against Hindus in independent India}}
The '''Godhra train burning''' occurred on the morning of 27 February 2002: 59 Hindu pilgrims and ''[[karsevaks]]'' returning from [[Ayodhya]] were killed in a fire inside the [[Sabarmati Express]] near the [[Godhra]] railway station in the Indian state of [[Gujarat]].<ref name="BBC 2011">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12605659 |work=BBC News |title=Eleven sentenced to death for India Godhra train blaze |access-date=20 June 2018 |archive-date=24 June 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140624025021/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12605659 |url-status=live }}</ref> The cause of the fire remains disputed.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Metcalf |first=Barbara D. |url=http://apnaorg.com/books/english/concise-history-india/concise-history-india.pdf |title=A Concise History of India |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2012 |isbn=978-1107026490 |pages=299–300 |access-date=30 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200429225106/http://apnaorg.com/books/english/concise-history-india/concise-history-india.pdf |archive-date=29 April 2020 |url-status=live}}: "The cause of the initial fire has not been determined, but it was almost certainly not deliberately set by Muslims on the station platform, as Hindus frequently alleged."</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Ghassem-Fachandi |first=Parvis |title=Pogrom in Gujarat: Hindu Nationalism and Anti-Muslim Violence in India |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2012 |isbn=978-0-691-15176-2 |pages=31–33, 93–100 |quote=There are competing versions as to how exactly the fire started in the train bogies. While the Nanavati commission of inquiry (NCI), instated soon after the Gujarat pogrom and completed in 2008, declared that the fire in the train bogies was a premeditated act by Muslim conspirators, the Banerjee commission, instated in 2004, questioned the theory of premeditation and called the incident an accident. The Gujarat High Court ruled the latter commission illegal in 2006. Both commissions of inquiry are regularly derided as "politically motivated" by respective opposing political constituencies. Uncertainties surrounding the incident remain.}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite book |last=Jaffrelot |first=Christophe |title=Modi's India: Hindu nationalism and the rise of ethnic democracy |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2021 |isbn=9780691206806 |pages=39, 476 |language=en |quote=Hundreds of Muslims then allegedly attacked with stones and torches, particularly the two wagons where the fifty-nine victims were found. The facts must be stated with caution here, because expert reports and counter reports have continued to contradict each other ever since [..] The idea that the attack was "pre-planned" has never been substantiated by the slightest piece of evidence.}}</ref> The [[2002 Gujarat riots|Gujarat riots]], in which Muslims were the targets of widespread and severe violence, occurred shortly afterward.<ref name=":1" />

The [[Nanavati-Mehta Commission|Nanavati-Mehta commission]], appointed by the state government in the immediate aftermath of the event, concluded in 2008 that the burning was a pre-planned arson committed by a thousand-strong Muslim mob.<ref name="NDTV 2011" /> The Banerjee commission, instituted by the [[Ministry of Railways (India)|Ministry of Railways]], characterized the fire as an accident in 2006:<ref>{{Cite web |title=Godhra train fire accidental: Banerjee report |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/godhra-train-fire-accidental-banerjee-report/articleshow/1437742.cms |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=The Times of India |language=en}}</ref> however, the Gujarat High Court found its appointment to be unconstitutional and quashed all findings.<ref>{{Cite web |title=HC terms Sabarmati Express panel illegal |url=https://www.financialexpress.com/archive/hc-terms-sabarmati-express-panel-illegal/180656/ |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=The Financial Express |language=en-US}}</ref> An independent investigation by a non-governmental organization also supported the theory of the burning being an accident.<ref>{{Cite web |title=More light on Godhra fire |url=https://frontline.thehindu.com/the-nation/article30203493.ece |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=frontline.thehindu.com |language=en}}</ref> Scholars remain skeptical about the claims of arson.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite book |last=Narula |first=Smita |title=Hinduism and Law: An Introduction |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2010 |isbn=978-0-521-88786-1 |editor-last=Lubin |editor-first=Timothy |pages=247 |chapter=Law and Hindu nationalist movements |quote=Because the fire was immediately preceded by a skirmish between the Hindu passengers and Muslims at the train station, the police – despite a lack of hard evidence – proceeded on the assumption that the fire was the result of a Muslim conspiracy. |editor-last2=Davis, Jr. |editor-first2=Donald R. |editor-last3=Krishnan |editor-first3=Jayanth K.}}</ref>

In February 2011, the trial court convicted 31 Muslims for the burning, relying extensively on the Nanavati-Mehta Commission report as evidence.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Guilty verdict |url=https://frontline.thehindu.com/the-nation/article30174816.ece |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=frontline.thehindu.com |language=en}}</ref> In October 2017, the Gujarat High Court upheld the convictions.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.livelaw.in/godhra-train-carnage-gujarat-hc-commutes-death-penalty-11-convicts-awards-10-lakh-compensation-victims-kin-read-judgment/|title=Godhra Train Carnage: Gujarat HC Commutes Death Penalty Of 11 Convicts; Awards 10 Lakh Compensation To Victims' Kin|first=Apoorva|last=Mandhani|access-date=1 June 2018}}</ref>

== 27 February 2002 incident ==
[[File:Godhra jn railway station.JPG|thumb|The platform at Godhra Junction. The incident is said to have taken place a short distance away.]]
In February 2002, thousands of devotees of [[Rama]] (known as "Ramsevaks" or "[[Kar Sevak]]s") had gone from [[Gujarat]] to [[Ayodhya]] at the behest of the [[Vishva Hindu Parishad]] to take part in a ceremony called the ''Purnahuti Maha Yagna''. On 25 February, 1,700 people, a mix of pilgrims and ''karsevaks'' boarded the [[Sabarmati Express]], which was bound for [[Ahmedabad]].<ref name=rediff1>{{cite news|title=Fifty-eight killed in attack on Sabarmati Express |url=http://www.rediff.co.in/news/2002/feb/27train2.htm|access-date=11 May 2013|newspaper=Rediff}}</ref> On 27 February 2002, the train made its scheduled stop at Godhra about four hours late, at 7:43 am. As the train started leaving the platform, someone pulled the [[Emergency brake (train)|emergency brake]], and the train stopped near the signal point. The driver of the train later stated that the chain had been pulled multiple times, judging by the instruments in his cabin.<ref name=driver>{{cite news|title=Sabarmati Express drivers appear before panel |url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2002-07-19/ahmedabad/27297556_1_assistant-driver-mukesh-pachauri-train|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203051951/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2002-07-19/ahmedabad/27297556_1_assistant-driver-mukesh-pachauri-train|url-status=dead|archive-date=3 December 2013|access-date=30 November 2013|newspaper=[[The Times of India]] }}</ref>

Then, according to one narrative, the train was attacked by a mob of around 2,000 people. After some stone-pelting, four train coaches were set alight, trapping many people inside. 59 people, including 27 women and 10 children{{citation needed}}, were burnt to death, and 48 others were injured.{{cn}} According to J Mahapatra, [[Additional Director General of Police|additional director general]] of the [[Gujarat]] police, "miscreants had kept the petrol-soaked rags ready for use much before the train had arrived at [[Godhra]]".<ref>{{cite news |last=Singh |first=Onkar |title=No women kidnapped in Godhra: Police |url=http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/mar/06train1.htm |access-date=6 April 2014 |newspaper=Rediff }}</ref> In September 2008, the [[Nanavati-Mehta Commission]] submitted the part of its report covering the Godhra train burning incident (Part I) in which it had concluded that burning of the S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express near [[Godhra]] railway station was a "planned conspiracy".<ref>{{cite web | url=https://indianexpress.com/article/india/gujarat/nanavati-commission-submits-final-report-on-2002-gujarat-riots/?SocialMedia | title=2002 Gujarat riots: Nanavati Commission submits final report to Anandiben Patel | date=18 November 2014 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Nanavati-panels-final-report-in-July/articleshow/35740740.cms | title=Nanavati panel's final report in July | India News – Times of India | website=[[The Times of India]] | date=30 May 2014 }}</ref>

The cause of the fire is disputed.<ref name=":0" /> In 2003, the Concerned Citizens Tribunal concluded that the fire had been an accident.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Genocide in Gujarat: Patterns of violence |url=http://www.humanrights.asia/resources/journals-magazines/article2/focus-the-international-criminal-court/genocide-in-gujarat-patterns-of-violence/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210227053831/http://www.humanrights.asia/resources/journals-magazines/article2/0201/genocide-in-gujarat-patterns-of-violence/ |archive-date=27 February 2021 |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=Asian Human Rights Commission |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Godhra |url=https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/godhra/218036 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220805184558/https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/godhra/218036/amp |archive-date=5 August 2022 |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=Outlook India}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Crime Against Humanity |url=https://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/tribunal2.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220101165159/https://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/tribunal2.pdf |archive-date=1 July 2022 |access-date=2022-08-31}}</ref>

Several other independent commentators also concluded that the fire itself was almost certainly an accident, saying that the initial cause of the conflagration was never conclusively determined.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Metcalf |first1=Barbara D. |url= |title=A Concise History of Modern India |last2=Metcalf |first2=Thomas R. |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-107-02649-0 |pages=280 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Clark-Decès |first=Isabelle |url= |title=A Companion to the Anthropology of India |publisher=Wiley |isbn=978-1-4051-9892-9 |pages=245 |language=en}}</ref> Historian [[Ainslie Thomas Embree]] stated that the official story of the attack on the train—that it was organized and carried out by people under orders from Pakistan—was entirely baseless.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Seiple |first1=Chris |url= |title=The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Security |last2=Hoover |first2=Dennis |last3=Otis |first3=Pauletta |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-66744-9 |pages=233 |language=en}}</ref> Scholar [[Martha Nussbaum]] has also challenged this narrative, stating that several inquiries have found that the conflagration was the result of an accident rather than a planned conspiracy.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Nussbaum |first=Martha C. |url= |title=The Clash Within: Democracy, Religious Violence, and India's Future |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0-674-03059-6 |pages=17–19 |language=en}}</ref>

==Inquiries==

===Forensic Science Laboratory Report===
A study conducted by the Gujarat Forensic Science Laboratory report states that the fire was due to the inflammable liquid emptied by the attackers into the coach. Furthermore, the fire got initiated from inside, and as a result, there was less scorching on the outside of the coach below the windows.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/godhra-massacre-forensic-report-come-in-handy-for-rival-politicians/1/219241.html|title=Fuelling the Fire|publisher=indiatoday.intoday.in|access-date=13 April 2014|archive-date=9 December 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171209201118/http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/godhra-massacre-forensic-report-come-in-handy-for-rival-politicians/1/219241.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=FSLReport>{{cite web|title=Report of Forensic Science Laboratory, State of Gujarat|url=http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?218028|publisher=Outlook|access-date=19 April 2014}}</ref>

===Nanavati-Mehta commission===
{{Main|Nanavati-Mehta Commission}}

==== Appointment ====
On 6 March 2002, the Gujarat government set up a commission of inquiry to investigate the incident and submit a report, the chairman and sole member of which was retired [[Gujarat High Court]] judge K G Shah.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2002/03/07/stories/2002030706110100.htm |title=The Hindu : Probe panel appointed |publisher=Hinduonnet.com |access-date=4 June 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030210180012/http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2002/03/07/stories/2002030706110100.htm |archive-date=10 February 2003 |url-status=usurped }}</ref> However, Shah's alleged closeness to Narendra Modi generated fierce criticism from the victims, human rights organisations, and political parties, and led to a demand for the appointment of a [[Supreme Court of India|Supreme Court]] judge to the commission. As a result, the government reconstituted the commission into a two-member committee, appointing retired Supreme Court judge G T Nanavati to lead the commission, which thus became known as the "Nanavati-Shah Commission".{{sfn|Jaffrelot|2012|p=79}}

Shah died in March 2008, just a few months before the committee submitted its first report, and the Gujarat High Court then appointed retired judge Akshay Kumar Mehta to the committee on 6 April 2008.<ref>{{cite news|title=Newly appointed justice Mehta of Nanavati Commission visits Godhra |url=http://www.indlaw.com/guest/DisplayNews.aspx?56B07EF3-D892-4C2A-9912-290F301FEC75 |access-date=11 May 2013 |newspaper=IndLaw |agency=UNI |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203025216/http://www.indlaw.com/guest/DisplayNews.aspx?56B07EF3-D892-4C2A-9912-290F301FEC75 |archive-date=3 December 2013 |df=dmy }}</ref> The commission, during its six-year probe, examined more than 40,000 documents and the testimonies of more than 1,000 witnesses.<ref>{{cite news|title=Gujarat: Nanavati Commission submitted its first report on 2002 riots in state |url=http://www.indlaw.com/guest/DisplayNews.aspx?B42ED5C4-09FE-4F2E-988F-225B5F66F8C6 |access-date=11 May 2013 |newspaper=IndLaw |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203025211/http://www.indlaw.com/guest/DisplayNews.aspx?B42ED5C4-09FE-4F2E-988F-225B5F66F8C6 |archive-date=3 December 2013 |df=dmy }}</ref> The initial term of the committee was three months long; however, it received 22 extensions, till June 2014, to submit its final report.<ref name="Indian Express">{{cite news|title=Nanavati panel gets its 20th extension|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/nanavati-panel-gets-its-20th-extension/1136987/|access-date=2 December 2013|newspaper=The Indian Express}}</ref><ref name="TOI1114">{{cite news|title=With 21st extension, Nanavati report after LS polls|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/With-21st-extension-Nanavati-report-after-LS-polls/articleshow/28209339.cms|access-date=19 April 2014|newspaper=Times of India}}</ref>

====Report====
In September 2008, the commission submitted the "Part I" of the report dealing with the Godhra incident, in which it supported the theory originally propounded by the Gujarat police.{{sfn|Jaffrelot|2012|p=80}} Maulvi Husain Haji Ibrahim Umarji, a cleric in Godhra, and a dismissed [[Central Reserve Police Force]] officer named Nanumiyan were presented as the "masterminds" behind the operation.<ref name="India 2008">[http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:LowLevelEntityToPrint_TOI&Type=text/html&Locale=english-skin-custom&Path=TOIM/2008/09/27&ID=Ar01400 The Godhra conspiracy as Justice Nanavati saw it] The Times of India, 28 September 2008. Retrieved 19 February 2012. [https://web.archive.org/web/20130602070023/http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:LowLevelEntityToPrint_TOI&Type=text/html&Locale=english-skin-custom&Path=TOIM/2008/09/27&ID=Ar01400 Archived] 21 February 2012.</ref> The evidence marshalled by the committee in favour of this conclusion was a statement made by Jabir Binyamin Behra, a criminal in custody at the time, although he later denied giving any such statement.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/1511763/report-godhra-case-eventually-maulvi-umarji-comes-out-unscathed|title=Godhra case: Eventually, Maulvi Umarji comes out unscathed|work=Daily News and Analysis|access-date=4 June 2013}}</ref> In addition, the alleged acquisition of 140 litres of petrol hours before the arrival of the train and the storage of the petrol at the guest house of Razzak Kurkur, accused of being a key conspirator, and forensic evidence showing that fuel was poured on the train coach before it burnt, was presented by the committee.<ref name="India 2008" /> The report concluded that thousands of Muslims from the Signal Falia area attacked the train.<ref name=IT1>{{cite news|last=Uday|first=Mahurkar|title=Godhra carnage a conspiracy: Nanavati report|url=http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Godhra+carnage+a+conspiracy:+Nanavati+report/1/16270.html|access-date=11 May 2013|newspaper=India Today}}</ref><ref name=ibn2009>{{cite news|title=Gujarat may come clean today, say 1,180 died in riots|url=http://ibnlive.in.com/news/gujarat-may-come-clean-today-say-1180-died-in-riots/86485-3.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090302054521/http://ibnlive.in.com/news/gujarat-may-come-clean-today-say-1180-died-in-riots/86485-3.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=2 March 2009|access-date=30 May 2013|newspaper=IBN7}}</ref>

====Reactions====
The [[Communist Party of India (Marxist)]] and the [[Indian National Congress]] objected to the exoneration of the Gujarat government by the commission, citing the timing of the report (with general elections months away) as evidence of unfairness. Congress spokesperson [[Veerappa Moily]] commented on the strange absolvement of the Gujarat government for complacency for the carnage before the commission's second and final report had been brought out. The CPI(M) said that the report reinforced communal prejudices.<ref>{{cite news|title=Cong, CPM question Nanavati report's credibility|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-09-27/india/27895962_1_nanavati-report-nanavati-commission-justice-nanavati|access-date=30 May 2013|archive-date=29 June 2013|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130629121439/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-09-27/india/27895962_1_nanavati-report-nanavati-commission-justice-nanavati|newspaper=[[The Times of India]]|url-status=dead}}</ref> The commission has been heavily criticised by academics such as [[Christophe Jaffrelot]] for obstructing the course of justice, supporting the conspiracy theory too quickly, and for allegedly ignoring evidence of governmental complicity in the incident.{{sfn|Jaffrelot|2012|pp=86–87}}<ref>{{cite journal|last=Iyer|first=SH|title=Babu Bajrangi's bail and Gujarat riot probe|journal=Combat Law|volume=7|issue=3|pages=16–19}}</ref>

===Banerjee investigation===

====Appointment and report====
[[File:The high level committee on Godhra fire incident, headed by Justice U.C. Banerjee, Retired Supreme Court Judge, presenting its final report to the Chairman, Railway Board, Shri J.P. Batra in New Delhi on March 3, 2006.jpg|thumb|Justice U.C. Banerjee, presenting the final report of enquiry on Godhra fire incident to the Chairman of the Railway Board, J.P. Batra, in New Delhi in 2006]]
On 17 May 2004, with the victory of the [[United Progressive Alliance]] (UPA) in the Indian general election, [[Lalu Prasad Yadav]] was appointed railway minister. In September 2004, two and half years after the train burning, Yadav appointed former Supreme Court Justice [[Umesh Chandra Banerjee]] to investigate the incident. In January 2005, Banerjee presented his interim report, which tentatively ascribed the fire as an "accidental fire" after ruling out other theories. He cited a forensic report stating that the injuries on the victims were only compatible with an "internal fire." The report was also critical of the railways' handling of the evidence relevant to the case.{{sfn|Jaffrelot|2012|pp=77–80}}<ref>{{cite web|title=Excerpts from the Justice U C Banerjee Committee report|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-excerptsfrom-the-justice-u-c-banerjee-committeereport-1016092|work=Daily News and Analysis|access-date=2 December 2013}}</ref><ref name="GJHC20-03-2006">{{cite web|title=Union of India vs. Nilkanth Tulsidas Bhatia, LPA No. 364 of 2005 in SCA No. 16500 of 2005|url=http://indiankanoon.org/doc/892047/|publisher=Gujarat High Court|access-date=2 April 2014}}</ref>

==== High Court judgment ====
Banerjee's findings were challenged in the Gujarat High Court by Neelkanth Tulsidas Bhatia, who was injured in the incident. In October 2006, the court quashed the conclusions of Banerjee. It ruled that the investigation was "unconstitutional, illegal and null and void", declared its formation to be a "colourable exercise of power with mala fide intentions", and its argument of accidental fire "opposed to the prima facie accepted facts on record." The High Court also directed that the report should not be tabled in the Parliament.<ref>[http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=75485 Banerjee panel illegal: Gujarat HC] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100524035416/http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=75485 }} ''The Indian Express'' – 13 October 2006</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20061104020147/http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/14/stories/2006101405431200.htm Bannerjee Committee illegal: High Court] [[The Hindu]] – 14 October 2006</ref><ref>{{cite news | title = HC terms Sabarmati Express panel illegal |work=The Financial Express | url = http://www.financialexpress.com/news/story/180656/| access-date= 4 February 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | title = Laloo flaunts Godhra report |work=The Tribune | url = http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050121/main1.htm| access-date= 4 February 2013 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | title = India train fire 'not mob attack' |work=BBC News | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4180885.stm| access-date= 4 February 2011 }}</ref><ref name="express-2006">{{cite news | title = Banerjee panel illegal: Gujarat HC | author = Press Trust of India | publisher = Express India | date = 13 October 2006 | url = http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=75485 | access-date = 4 February 2011  | archive-date = 24 May 2010 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100524035416/http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=75485 | url-status = dead }}</ref><ref name=ibnnews16oct06>{{cite web|title=BJP cheers as HC slams Godhra panel|url=http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bjp-cheers-as-hc-slams-godhra-panel/23990-4-2.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140325083341/http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bjp-cheers-as-hc-slams-godhra-panel/23990-4-2.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=25 March 2014|publisher=IBN Live|access-date=25 March 2014}}</ref>{{Excessive citations inline|reason=Unnecessary [[BP:CITEKILL]] for a simple ruling, see if there's useful info in them that can be used elsewhere}}

====Reactions====
The BJP, which was then in the opposition in the union parliament, dismissed the report as an attempt to gain an advantage in the Bihar elections, which were to be held soon.<ref name=tribune2005>{{cite news|title=Godhra report attempt to help Laloo: BJP|url=http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050118/main1.htm|access-date=25 March 2014|newspaper=The Tribune}}</ref> It welcomed the High Court judgement, saying that it was a setback for the Congress.<ref name="tribune-2006">{{cite news|title=Gujarat HC nullifies Banerjee Committee|url=http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20061014/main1.htm|access-date=25 March 2014}}</ref> Lalu Prasad Yadav, then the minister for railways, cited the report as proof that the Narendra Modi government had organized the riots that followed, and called it an exposure of the BJP.<ref name=tribune2005/>

==Trial and court verdict==

===Arrests===
By 28 February 2002, 51 people had been arrested for the incident on charges of arson, rioting, and looting.<ref name=BBC>{{cite news|title=Dozens arrested over India train attack|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1845905.stm|access-date=1 January 2014|work=BBC News}}</ref> On 17 March 2002, a chief suspect Haji Bilal, a local town councillor and a Congress worker,<ref name=REFCON>{{cite news|title=Godhra, 'secular' 'progressives' and politics|url=https://www.rediff.com/news/2002/mar/25rajeev.htm|newspaper=Rediff News}}</ref> was captured by an anti-terrorist squad in Godhra. The FIR had alleged that a 1540-strong mob attacked the Sabarmati Express on 27 February, minutes after the delayed train left the Godhra station on the day of the incident. The president of Godhra municipality, Mohammed Hussain Kalota, was arrested in March. Others arrested included corporators Abdul Razak and Shiraj Abdul Jamesha. Bilal was also alleged to have a connection with gang leader Latif and was reported to have visited [[Karachi]] in [[Pakistan]] several times.<ref name=EI1>{{cite news|title=Chargesheet filed against 66 Godhra accused|url=http://expressindia.indianexpress.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=10692|access-date=1 January 2014|newspaper=Indian Express|agency=Press Trust of India}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Chief suspect in India train attack arrested|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1878385.stm|access-date=1 January 2014|newspaper=BBC}}</ref>

The SIT filed the charge-sheet before first class railway magistrate P. K. Joshi, which ran to more than 500 pages, stated that 59 people were killed in the S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express when a mob of around 1540 unidentified people attacked it near Godhra railway station.<ref name=rediff2>{{cite news|title=Charge sheet filed against 66 accused for Godhra mayhem|url=http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/may/23train.htm|access-date=30 November 2013|newspaper=Rediff}}</ref><ref name=liveindia /> The 68 people accused in the charge-sheet included 57 accused of stoning and torching the train. The charge-sheet also stated that a mob attacked the police, prevented the fire brigade from approaching the burning train, and stormed the train for a second time. Eleven others were charged with being part of this mob.<ref name=TH1>{{cite news|last=Dasgupta|first=Manas|title=Chargesheets filed in Godhra train carnage case|url=http://hindu.com/2002/05/24/stories/2002052402951300.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203064747/http://hindu.com/2002/05/24/stories/2002052402951300.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=3 December 2013|access-date=30 November 2013|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|location=Chennai, India}}</ref> Initially, 107 people were charged, five of whom died while the case was still pending in court. Eight others were juveniles who a separate court tried. As many as 253 witnesses were examined during the trial, and over items of 1500 documentary pieces of evidence were presented to the court.<ref name=liveindia1>{{cite news|title=Godhra train carnage judgement tomorrow |url=http://liveindia.tv/india/godhra-train-carnage-judgement-tomorrow/ |access-date=22 May 2013 |newspaper=Live India |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130625065302/http://liveindia.tv/india/godhra-train-carnage-judgement-tomorrow/ |archive-date=25 June 2013 |df=dmy }}</ref>

On 24 July 2015, the prime accused in the Godhra case, Hussain Suleman Mohammad, was arrested by the Godhra crime branch from Jhabua district of Madhya Pradesh.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Godhra-carnage-Main-accused-held-after-13-years/articleshow/48209717.cms|title=Godhra carnage: Main accused held after 13 years|website=[[The Times of India]]}}</ref> On 18 May 2016, a previously missing 'conspirator' of the event, Farooq Bhana, was arrested in Mumbai by Gujarat [[Anti-Terrorism Squad|Anti-Terrorist Squad]].<ref>[http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/After-14-yrs-man-who-added-fuel-to-Godhra-fire-arrested/articleshow/52335116.cms After 14 yrs, man who added fuel to Godhra fire arrested], The Times of India, 19 May 2016.</ref> On 30 January 2018, Yakub Pataliya (63) was arrested from Godhra by a team of B Division police in the town after they received a tip-off that he was spotted in a locality.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.mid-day.com/articles/2002-godhra-train-burning-63-year-old-accused-arrested-after-16-years/18998154|title=2002 Godhra train burning: 63-year-old accused arrested after 16 years|work=mid-day|access-date=2018-01-30}}</ref>

===Prevention of Terrorism Act and trial===
On 3 March 2002, The [[Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance]] (POTO) was invoked against all the accused, which was later suspended due to pressure from the Central government. On 9 March 2002, Police added Criminal Conspiracy to the charges. In May 2003, the first charge sheet was filed against 54 accused, but they were not charged under the [[Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002|Prevention of Terrorism Act]] (POTA).{{Efn|POTO became an Act as it was cleared by the Parliament.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2 April 2002 |title=President's assent to four more bills |url=https://archive.pib.gov.in/archive/releases98/lyr2002/rapr2002/02042002/r0204200214.html |access-date=2023-02-27 |website=archive.pib.gov.in}}</ref>}} In February 2003, the POTA was re-invoked against all the accused after the BJP retained control of the Gujarat legislature in the 2002 assembly [[2002 Gujarat legislative assembly election|elections]].<ref name=timelinetoi />

In November 2003, the Supreme Court of India stayed the trial. In 2004, the POTA was repealed after the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) came to power, prompting it to review the invocation of the POTA against the accused. In May 2005, the POTA review commission decided not to charge the accused under POTA. This was later unsuccessfully challenged by a victim's relative before the Gujarat High Court and later on appeal before Supreme Court. In September 2008, the Nanavati Commission submitted its report on the incident.<ref name=timelinetoi /> In 2009, after accepting the Special Investigation Team (SIT) report, the court appointed a special fast-track court to try the case and established five other fast-track courts to try the post-incident riots. The bench hearing the case also said public prosecutors should be appointed in consultation with the SIT chair. It ordered that the SIT would be the nodal agency for deciding about witness protection and also asked that it file supplementary charge sheets and that it may cancel the bail of the accused.<ref name="Hindu-trial">{{cite news|last=Venkatesan|first=J|title=Court: set up six fast track courts to try Godhra & riot cases|url=http://www.hindu.com/2009/05/02/stories/2009050257860100.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090502182039/http://www.hindu.com/2009/05/02/stories/2009050257860100.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=2 May 2009|access-date=22 May 2013|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|location=Chennai, India}}</ref> More than 100 people were arrested in relation to the incident. The court was set up inside the [[Sabarmati Central Jail]], where almost all accused were confined. The hearing began in May 2009.<ref>{{cite news|title=Godhra carnage: fast-track court begins proceedings|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/godhra-carnage-fasttrack-court-begins-proceedings/466585/|access-date=22 May 2013|newspaper=[[The Indian Express]]|location=Ahmedabad}}</ref> Additional Sessions Judge P R Patel was designated to hear the case.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Godhra riots: Gujarat HC appoints 9 judges |url=https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/godhra-riots-gujarat-hc-appoints-9-judges-393783 |access-date=2023-02-27 |website=[[NDTV]] |agency=[[Press Trust of India]]}}</ref>

In May 2010, Supreme Court restrained the trial courts from pronouncing judgement in nine sensitive riot cases, including the Godhra train incident. The trial was completed in September 2010; however, the verdict could not be delivered because of the Supreme Court's stay.<ref name=liveindia1 /> The stay was lifted in January 2011, and the judge announced that he would pronounce the judgement on 22 February 2011.<ref name="timelinetoi">{{cite news |title=Chronology of Godhra trial |newspaper=[[The Times of India]] |agency=[[Press Trust of India|PTI]] |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Chronology-of-Godhra-trial/articleshow/7546855.cms |url-status=live |access-date=22 May 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131001120531/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-02-22/india/28624659_1_godhra-train-u-c-banerjee-s-6 |archive-date=1 October 2013}}</ref>

===Court verdict===
In February 2011, the trial court convicted 31 people and acquitted 63 others, saying the incident was a planned conspiracy. The convictions were based on the murder and conspiracy provisions of Sections 302 and 120B of the [[Indian Penal Code]] respectively, and under Sections 149, 307, 323, 324, 325, 326, 332, 395, 397, and 436 of the Code and some sections of the Railway Act and Police Act.<ref name=liveindia /> The death penalty was awarded to 11 convicts; those believed to have been present at a meeting held the night before the incident where the conspiracy was formed, and those who, according to the court, had entered the coach and poured petrol before setting it afire. Twenty others were sentenced to life imprisonment.<ref name="NDTV 2011">{{cite news |url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/godhra-verdict-31-convicted-63-acquitted-86991 |title=Godhra verdict: 31 convicted, 63 acquitted |work=NDTV |access-date=9 June 2013 |archive-date=29 November 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141129024715/http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/godhra-verdict-31-convicted-63-acquitted-86991 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=Hindu1>{{cite news|title=It was not a random attack on S-6 but kar sevaks were targeted, says judge|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article1513008.ece|access-date=22 May 2013|newspaper=The Hindu|location=Chennai, India|first=Manas|last=Dasgupta|archive-date=17 January 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160117044114/http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article1513008.ece|url-status=live}}</ref>

Maulvi Saeed Umarji, who was believed by the SIT to be the prime conspirator, was acquitted<ref name=liveindia>{{cite news|title=Special court convicts 31 in Godhra train burning case |url=http://liveindia.tv/india/states/special-court-convicts-31-in-godhra-train-burning-case/ |access-date=22 May 2013 |newspaper=Live India |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130119002050/http://liveindia.tv/india/states/special-court-convicts-31-in-godhra-train-burning-case/ |archive-date=19 January 2013 |df=dmy }}</ref> along with 62 other accused for lack of evidence.<ref name=MD>{{cite news|title=Key accused let off in Godhra case|url=http://www.mid-day.com/news/2011/feb/230211-fast-track-court-Godhra-case-verdict-Sabarmati-Express.htm|access-date=22 May 2013|newspaper=Mid Day}}</ref> The convicted filed appeals in the Gujarat High Court. The state government also challenged the trial court's decision to acquit 61 persons in the High Court and sought death sentences for 20 convicts awarded life imprisonment in the case.<ref name=IE1>{{cite news|title=Guj govt challenges acquittals in Godhra verdict before HC|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/guj-govt-challenges-acquittals-in-godhra-verdict-before-hc/808659/|access-date=11 May 2013|newspaper=The Indian Express}}</ref>

=== Gujarat High Court verdict ===
In October 2017, accepting the prosecution's contention that there was a conspiracy behind the incident, the Gujarat High Court commuted the death sentence of 11 convicts to life imprisonment while upholding the earlier life sentence of 20 others.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/india/2002-godhra-train-burning-carnage-case-riots-gujarat-high-court-sit-commutes-death-sentence-of-11-convicts-to-life-imprisonment-4881586/|title=2002 Godhra train burning case: Gujarat HC commutes death sentence of 11 convicts to life imprisonment|work=The Indian Express|access-date=2017-10-09|language=en-US}}</ref> Thus, all the 31 accused who were convicted earlier in 2011 by the SIT court were given life imprisonment.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/2002-godhra-burning-case-gujarat-high-court-commutes-death-for-11-convicts-to-life-in-prison/articleshow/61001808.cms|title=2002 Godhra train burning case: Gujarat high court commutes death for 11 convicts to life in prison – Times of India|work=The Times of India|access-date=2017-10-09}}</ref> while, 63 others who were acquitted in 2011 by the trial court, were re-acquitted by the high court, including the alleged mastermind.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/in-godhra-train-burning-an-important-court-decision-today-10-points-1760393|title=In Godhra Train Blaze, Alleged Mastermind And 30 Others Acquitted Again|work=NDTV.com|access-date=2017-10-09}}</ref> The court ordered the state government and the railways to pay {{INRConvert|10|l|year=2017}} compensation to the families of each of the 59 victims.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.news18.com/news/india/godhra-train-burning-case-hc-orders-compensation-for-victims-kin-1540441.html|title=Godhra Train Burning Case: HC Faults State Govt, Orders Rs 10 Lakh for Victims' Kin|work=News18|access-date=2017-10-09}}</ref>

===Reactions to the SIT investigation ===
BJP spokesperson [[Syed Shahnawaz Hussain|Shahnawaz Hussain]] stated, "The theory propagated by the (central) government and some NGOs (Non-Governmental Organization) has been proved wrong...."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Vindicates stand on conspiracy: BJP |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/news-archive/web/vindicates-stand-on-conspiracy-bjp/ |access-date=2023-02-26 |website=The Indian Express |language=en}}</ref> Law Minister Veerappa Moily (a Congress Party member) said it was premature to comment and that the courts will take their own course.<ref>[http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=712707 Godhra Train Carnage Verdict: Reactions] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140104212654/http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=712707 }} Outlook India – 22 February 2011</ref> [[R. K. Raghavan]], who was the head of the [[Special Investigation Team (India)|Special Investigation Team]], said he was satisfied with the verdict. BJP spokesperson [[Ravi Shankar Prasad]] said the verdict had exposed the nefarious designs of the UPA government, which tried to cover up the entire episode.<ref name="OL-reactions">{{cite news|title=Godhra Train Carnage Verdict: Reactions|url=http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=712707|access-date=11 May 2013|newspaper=Outlook India|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140104212654/http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=712707|archive-date=4 January 2014|url-status=dead}}</ref>

==In popular culture==
* ''[[Chand Bujh Gaya]]'', a 2005 film, uses the Godhra train burning incident as the background for a love story.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ashraf |first=Syed Firdaus |title=The Gujarat factor |url=https://www.rediff.com/movies/2002/oct/02godh.htm |access-date=2023-02-26 |website=[[Rediff.com]]}}</ref>
* The 2013 film ''[[Kai Po Che!]]'' had the Gujarat riots as a backdrop for the main narrative. It was based on the novel ''[[The 3 Mistakes of My Life]]'' written by [[Chetan Bhagat]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gupta |first=Trisha |title=Framing the divide |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/framing-the-divide/ |access-date=2023-02-26 |website=The Indian Express |language=en}}</ref>
* The 2004 documentary ''[[Final Solution (2004 film)|Final Solution]]'' depicts the train burning and the Gujarat riots that followed.<ref>{{Cite news |title=India bans religious riot movie |language=en-GB |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3542340.stm |access-date=2023-02-26}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Best Bakery case]]
* [[Naroda Patiya massacre]]

== Notes ==
{{Noteslist}}

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==Bibliography==
{{Refbegin|30em}}
* {{cite book |last=Brass |first=Paul R. |title=The Production of Hindu-Muslim Violence in Contemporary India |publisher=University of Washington Press |isbn=978-0-295-98506-0 |year=2005}}
* {{cite news |last=Burke |first=Jason |title=Godhra train fire verdict prompts tight security measures |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/22/godhra-train-fire-verdict |access-date=5 April 2014 |newspaper=The Guardian |archive-date=23 October 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131023065143/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/22/godhra-train-fire-verdict |url-status=live}}
* {{cite book |editor-first=Isabelle |editor-last=Clark-Decès |title=A Companion to the Anthropology of India |year=2011 |publisher=Wiley-Blackwell |isbn=978-1405198929}}
* {{cite book |last=Ghassem-Fachandi |first=Parvis |title=Pogrom in Gujarat: Hindu Nationalism and Anti-Muslim Violence in India |year=2012 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0691151779}}
* {{cite journal |last=Jaffrelot |first=Christophe |title=Communal Riots in Gujarat: The State at Risk? |journal=Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics |year=2003 |url=http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/4127/1/hpsacp17.pdf |access-date=5 November 2013 |archive-date=4 December 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131204131058/http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/4127/1/hpsacp17.pdf |url-status=live}}
* {{cite journal |last=Jaffrelot |first=Christophe |title=Gujarat 2002: What Justice for the Victims? |url=http://www.epw.in/journal/2012/08/special-articles/gujarat-2002-what-justice-victims.html |url-access=subscription |journal=Economic & Political Weekly |volume=XLVII |issue=8 |pages=77–80 |jstor=41419907}}
* {{cite book |last=Kishwar |first=Madhu Purnima |title=Modi, Muslims and Media: Voices from Narendra Modi's Gujarat |year=2014 |publisher=Manushi Publications, New Delhi}}
* {{citation |last=Mitta |first=Manoj |title=The Fiction of Fact-Finding: Modi & Godhra |year=2014 |publisher=HarperCollins Publishers India |isbn=978-93-5029-187-0}}
* {{cite book |last=Nussbaum |first=Martha C. |chapter=The Clash Within: Democracy and the Hindu Right |url=https://archive.org/details/valuesviolencein00kara |url-access=limited |year=2008 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-1402086595 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/valuesviolencein00kara/page/n94 81]–97 |editor=Ibrahim A. Karawan |editor2=Ibrāhīm Karawān |editor3=Wayne McCormack |editor4=Stephen E. Reynolds |title=Values and Violence: Intangible Aspects of Terrorism}}
* {{cite book |last=Nussbaum |first=Martha C. |title=The Clash Within: Democracy, Religious Violence and India's Future |year=2007 |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0-674-03059-6}}
* {{cite book |last=Williams |first=Philippa |chapter=Hindu–Muslim Relations and the "War on Terror" |title=A Companion to the Anthropology of India |year=2011 |publisher=Wiley-Blackwell |isbn=978-1405198929 |editor=Isabelle Clark-Decès |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=98uLj5FpTHQC&pg=RA9-PA1988}}
{{Refend}}

==External links==
* [http://home.gujarat.gov.in/homedepartment/downloads/godharaincident.pdf Report By The Commission of Inquiry Consisting of Mr. Justice G.T. Nanavati And Mr. Justice Akshay H. Mehta] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130316134832/http://home.gujarat.gov.in/homedepartment/downloads/godharaincident.pdf }}
* [http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/ Detailed Report on the Godhra riots by the Concerned Citizens Tribunal]

{{2002 Gujarat riots}}
{{Railway accidents and incidents in 2002}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Godhra Train Burning}}
[[Category:Conflicts in 2002]]
[[Category:Mass murder in 2002]]
[[Category:Arson attacks on vehicles]]
[[Category:History of Gujarat (1947–present)]]
[[Category:Massacres in India]]
[[Category:Violence against Hindus in India]]
[[Category:2002 crimes in India]]
[[Category:2002 Gujarat riots]]
[[Category:Railway accidents and incidents in Gujarat]]
[[Category:Persecution by Muslims]]
[[Category:21st-century Hinduism]]
[[Category:February 2002 events in Asia]]
[[Category:Train and rapid transit fires]]