Fighting corruption must remain priority A government is expected to maintain public order and ensure the effective delivery of services to citizens. For peace, stability and prosperity of a society, governance must remain fair, transparent and accountable. While preventing corruption and unlawful activities is among the foremost responsibilities of an elected government, despite the existence of several enforcement agencies such as the Vigilance Bureau, ED, EOW and CBI, the menace of corruption and unethical practices continues to persist across the country. Corruption has become so deeply entrenched in business circles, administrative offices and even civic body institutions that bribes are often demanded for routine and legitimate services. Artificial hurdles are deliberately created, forcing citizens to grease palms merely to avoid unnecessary delays and harassment. Even more disturbing is the growing perception of political corruption, wherein allegations frequently surface regarding the misuse of government machinery and investigative agencies to suppress opposition, influence electoral outcomes, or secure high-profile positions. The recent arrest of Punjab Cabinet Minister Sanjiv Arora following ED raids, along with reports of political defections after investigations at the business premises of certain MPs, has triggered widespread debate. With legislative elections in the state only months away, the timing of such actions naturally gives rise to suspicion and strengthens public speculation. Many observers view such developments as attempts at political arm-twisting or inducement aimed at changing party loyalties, irrespective of the people’s mandate. The continued prevalence of such malpractices, despite the presence of powerful watchdog agencies, presents a disturbing paradox. While the fight against corruption must remain a central priority of any ruling dispensation, the alleged misuse of enforcement agencies for political ends undermines public faith in impartial governance. A nexus between corrupt officials, influential patrons and political leaders enables this rot to survive unchecked. The electorate is watching these developments with scepticism, as actions perceived to be politically motivated cast a shadow over the ideals of democracy and good governance. Only through transparent governance, institutional accountability and credible public engagement can we build a responsive, efficient and corruption-free administration; otherwise, eyebrows will always be raised about such behaviour.
Nirmaljit Singh Chatrath
Fair investigations strengthen democracy
Ahead of elections, frequent raids by enforcement agencies often raise questions in the public mind. While such actions may reflect efforts to curb corruption and misuse of money power, concerns are also expressed about possible political targeting. Public confidence in democratic institutions depends not only on action against wrongdoing but also on the perception of fairness and neutrality. In a healthy democracy, the credibility of investigations depends upon transparency, accountability and equal treatment for all, irrespective of political affiliation. Agencies must act strictly on evidence and ensure that investigations are conducted independently, professionally and concluded within a reasonable time without unnecessary delays. At the same time, public representatives facing allegations should cooperate fully with lawful inquiries instead of immediately terming every action as political vendetta. Strong institutions, impartial investigations and timely justice are essential for maintaining public confidence in democracy, constitutional values and the rule of law.
JP Singh
Law must take its own course
The Enforcement Directorate (ED), Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Vigilance Department are not new. The Enforcement Directorate and CBI directly come under the Union Government, whereas the Vigilance Department comes under the State Government. Numerous cases have been directly supervised by the ED and CBI in the past, bringing several individuals under scrutiny and trialed in court. Similarly, the State Vigilance Department directly reports to the Chief Minister and Home Minister of the State and keeps strict vigil on other state government departments. Recently, the Enforcement Department raided multiple business houses after confirming concrete information of fund misuse. Similarly, the Vigilance Department periodically apprehends persons involved in corrupt practices. All investigative agencies work under the law and those indulging in corrupt practices must face the consequences, as these agencies operate independently on the merits of each case. It is clear that the law must take its own course and nobody is above it. Political leaders should refrain from terming raids or investigations as politically motivated or vindictive.
Rajat Kumar Mohindru
Slogan of public service is an eyewash
Unfortunately, the situation highlights both inherent corruption, misuse of money and muscle power on one side and a tool to target the opposition on the other. The phenomenon clearly exposes a political drama aimed at either grabbing or retaining power for material gains, while the slogan of public service is mere eyewash. In other words, both government and opposition leaders are primarily engaged in amassing wealth and material benefits. Most political leaders exploit the guise of public service for personal gain, with hidden manipulations ultimately favouring their pursuits directly or indirectly. Those in power misuse government enforcement agencies for political gains and simultaneously signal opposition leaders on how to exploit these agencies when in power. The ultimate losers are the public and a fragile democracy that boasts of being the most pampered child of our constitution.
Jagdish Chander
Raids raise election concerns
Recent actions by the Enforcement Directorate have resulted in multiple raids and investigations, specifically targeting government officials and leaders. However, the timing, so close to elections, raises doubts about the efficiency and legitimacy of the agency—whether this is a genuine clean-up drive or a way to eliminate political opponents. Nonetheless, such efforts are for the greater good and there should be impartial, unbiased and formidable measures to expose and eradicate corruption through regular raids and surveillance. Additionally, more police and special task forces should be deployed to aid in black money clean-up. These steps, although overdue, are crucial for the city’s wellness, productivity and ensuring an equal chance of success for every citizen in Punjab.
Lakshit Jindal
No individual is above Constitution
The growing trend of Enforcement Directorate raids just before elections raises a larger constitutional and moral question before the nation — whether agencies are being used to uphold accountability or to influence the political narrative. Corruption must undoubtedly be punished with firmness and without compromise. Public office is a sacred trust, not a licence for misuse of power, money, or influence. If corruption, black money and abuse of authority exist, strict legal action is undoubtedly necessary, irrespective of political status or party affiliation. No individual is above the Constitution or the rule of law. The rule of law cannot change with political convenience. If corruption is the issue, then action must be fearless, uniform and continuous against all guilty persons, whether they belong to the ruling party or the opposition. Constitutional institutions should inspire confidence, not suspicion. On the other hand, when such actions intensify mainly during election periods and appear concentrated against opposition leaders, it naturally creates public suspicion regarding selective targeting and political misuse of investigative agencies. Justice must not only be done but manifestly and deliberately seem to be done in a fair, transparent and impartial manner. India’s democracy is strongest when justice is transparent, institutions are independent and citizens believe that law is applied equally to every individual, without fear, favour, or political motive. In a healthy democracy, investigative agencies should function independently, free from political influence and their actions should be guided solely by evidence, constitutional values and due process of law. Public confidence can survive only when law acts equally against all, without fear or favour. However, the timing and pattern of such raids often create a strong public perception that investigative agencies are being used selectively against opposition leaders during politically sensitive periods. When enforcement appears unequal, democracy itself comes under scrutiny. Investigative powers are meant to protect the nation, not to create fear, political pressure, or electoral advantage. A democracy survives not merely through elections, but through impartial institutions. Agencies like the Enforcement Directorate must function independently, transparently and strictly within constitutional boundaries. Action against corruption should be consistent throughout the year and against all offenders alike, whether in power or in opposition. The true strength of the rule of law lies in fairness, neutrality and public trust.
Sandeep Kanwal Singh Chhabra
Power corrupts political circles
“Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” is an age-old aphorism that finds particular relevance in Indian political circles, especially when elections are around the corner. There has been a deep-rooted conscience attached to this statement, reflecting the fact that the massive increase in corrupt tendencies is attributable to the widely supported non-decisive intent of government instrumentalities to live up to the expectations of the people at large. Institutions that are expected to stand with and support the people often resort to unacceptable practices, which gradually become normalised and widely accepted in society. This is widely circulated among those left at the mercy of political bigwigs, forced to get work done at the cost of hush money—a practice that ought to be discouraged. Conducting massive raids by centrally deputed agencies in areas likely to undergo elections in the near future, unless yielding public good by establishing deterrence and restraint, will have limited impact and meagre ramifications. Such actions, unless carefully monitored, may fail to reinforce genuine accountability or curb corruption effectively.
Sameer Bhatia
People should scrutinise politics
One major question arises today: what happens to ED investigations when a leader or minister facing serious corruption allegations suddenly joins another political party? Does changing parties magically make all allegations disappear, or do investigations lose momentum for political reasons? How does this system actually function and why are such patterns rarely questioned openly? What is even more concerning is that many citizens ignore these contradictions and continue supporting leaders without demanding accountability. People must stay aware, critically observe the political games being played by all parties and vote responsibly based on transparency, governance, honesty and public welfare rather than emotion, propaganda or blind political loyalty.
Ravneet Kaur
ED must function fairly, transparently
The increasing raids by the Enforcement Directorate before elections have become a serious public concern. While such actions may reflect efforts to curb corruption, black money and misuse of power, their timing often raises suspicion. In a democracy, no individual should be above the law and fair investigations are essential for accountability. However, when opposition leaders are targeted more frequently during election periods, it creates the impression that investigative agencies are being used for political pressure rather than impartial justice. Such perceptions can weaken public trust in democratic institutions. Therefore, transparency, neutrality and accountability are essential. Agencies like the ED must function independently and fairly, free from political influence.
Nancy
Accountability must be equal
With elections approaching, the rise in Enforcement Directorate raids has renewed debate over whether political accountability is being applied evenly. Action against corruption and illegal financial practices is essential and no leader should be beyond investigation. However, repeated action against opposition figures during election periods often fuels allegations of selective targeting. Such patterns can raise doubts about the independence of investigative agencies and weaken the credibility of genuine anti-corruption efforts. To maintain public trust, investigations must remain transparent, balanced and consistent across all political parties. Accountability cannot appear one-sided. Agencies enforcing the law must function independently so that their actions are seen as instruments of justice rather than political strategy.
Smayara
