The Right to Be Bored
July 27, 2025
Nuclear Black Market: A Global Security Threat
July 31, 2025
Quratul ain Hafeez
In recent Years, a new form of coercive statecraft termed Bulldozer Politics has emerged in India, involving the demolition of homes, shops, and religious structures, particularly belonging to minority communities, especially Muslims. This practice, disguised as law enforcement or urban development, has been criticized for its selective targeting, bypassing due process, and implications for democratic rights and the rule of law.
Bulldozer politics disproportionately targets minority communities, bypassing due legal process.
At its core, the bulldozer politics intersects with land politics, majoritarian nationalism, and a retreat from India’s constitutional commitments to equality and secularism.t also raises urgent questions within the global human rights framework, implicating international organizations such as the UNHCR, OHCHR, and Amnesty International.
State governments in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Delhi have taken on the excessive use of Bulldozers as political symbols. Leaders like Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath project this tool as decisive governance, law and order, and retributive justice against criminals or rioters. However, civil rights activists argue that bulldozers have become instruments of collective punishment, particularly against Muslims following communal clashes or protests. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and police department conducted a demolition of a mosque in response to these concerns.
The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and police department conducted a demolition operation around Chandola Lake, citing illegal encroachments on public land. It removed nearly 500 housing units and twenty prayer locations. The community group illegal constructions. The operation covered 11 lakh square meters in the south zone.
While state authorities justify demolitions as responses to illegal encroachments, legal experts point to the consistent bypassing of legal procedures, including prior notice, court hearings, and rehabilitation mandates. The selective nature of demolitions. targeting minority-dominated localities, further suggests that these actions are less about legality and more about political signaling.
Bulldozer politics in India, particularly in megacities like Delhi and Mumbai, have a long history of informal settlements and state negligence. Governments often use the language of “development” and “beautification” to evict slum dwellers and informal workers. However, the communalized dimension of bulldozer politics makes it uniquely contentious. Many targeted neighborhoods are inhabited by economically marginalized minorities who are unable to produce formal land ownership documents due to generational displacement or lack of institutional support.
Demolitions violate constitutional protections, including equality and the right to shelter.
The denial of land rights becomes a tool of disenfranchisement, making citizenship precarious through spatial erasure. The use of demolition as a punitive measure violates foundational principles of justice, as seen in 2022 when local authorities in Khargone, Madhya Pradesh, demolished dozens of homes and shops without a judicial verdict.
The demolitions in India violate multiple constitutional protections, including Article 14, guaranteeing equality, and Article 21, ensuring life and personal liberty, including shelter. The Supreme Court ruled in the Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation case (1985), that eviction without alternative accommodation violates Article 21.
A critical intervention came in the form of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind verdict refers to a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of India in 2023 in response to a petition challenging the arbitrary bulldozer demolition of houses by state authorities, particularly targeting Muslim-owned properties following communal violence, protests, or other alleged offenses. It came in the broader context of bulldozer politics in India.
Bulldozer politics in India has raised concerns in the International community, for human rights and humanitarian law. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressed concern over the increasing trend of demolitions without due process or adequate notice, particularly affecting minorities. UN Special Rapporteurs have condemned the discriminatory nature of these acts, suggesting they may violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a party.
Subsequently, organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also documented these incidents as part of a larger pattern of state-sanctioned marginalization. Amnesty, in particular, has described such demolitions as “unlawful, arbitrary, and discriminatory,” calling for immediate cessation and redress mechanisms.
International bodies condemn these acts as discriminatory and unlawful.
As India positions itself as a rising power and seeks leadership roles in multilateral institutions like the G20 and the United Nations, bulldozer politics poses a reputational risk. Bulldozer politics in India is not merely about urban planning but a political strategy that weaponizes state machinery against vulnerable populations, violating constitutional guarantees and international human rights obligations.
It contradicts India’s claims to being the world’s largest democracy governed by the rule of law. Persistent international scrutiny of minority rights, particularly concerning Muslims, Dalits, and Adivasis, could undermine India’s soft power, especially in the Global South, where many look to India as a democratic counterbalance to authoritarian powers.
Furthermore, the marginalization of religious minorities through demolition drives erodes social cohesion and fuels grievances that can potentially radicalize youth or lead to cycles of protest and repression. It razes homes and livelihoods, affecting democratic citizenship and legal equality.
This strategy threatens democratic integrity and social stability, fueling grievances and marginalization.
If unchecked, this politics of erasure could lead to a two-tiered citizenship system, with minorities’ rights dependent on political majoritarianism. This undermines both national security and social stability in the long term. Civil society, the judiciary, and international human rights bodies must resist this trend and hold the Indian state accountable to its constitutional and international obligations.
The author is a Doctoral researcher at the School of Politics and International Relations, QAU, Islamabad.
