A few heart whole, sincere and energetic men and women can do more in a year than a mob in a century.
– Swami Vivekananda
Introduction
The rising median age of parliamentarians is a pressing concern globally, Especially in India, Ironically, Majority of the country’s population being below the age of 35 years (hereinafter referred to as “young”) do not find themselves adequately represented or heard in the highest legislative body.
In an effort to address this challenge, the Member of Parliament from the Thiruvananthapuram constituency, Dr. Shashi Tharoor, introduced a private member’s bill during the monsoon session of Parliament. The bill proposed an amendment to Article 81 of the Constitution and the insertion of a proviso: “to reserve at least 10 seats for persons below the age of thirty-five years, to be chosen by direct election on a rotation basis,” in the Lok Sabha. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the bill described young people, who account for more than 60% of the country’s population, as an ‘excluded minority’ in the Parliament of India. Further, this insufficient representation undermines collective decision-making, constituting a ‘democratic deficit’. Thus, there is an urgent need for affirmative action to bridge this gap. Currently, the Constitution of India, under Article 84, the minimum age required to contest for the membership of Lok Sabha is twenty – five years, and for Rajya Sabha is thirty years.
What does the Data Show?
The figures clearly portray the graveness of the problem of young under-representation. In the 1957 general elections, young people constituted approximately upto 34% of Parliament, but this percentage has continuously declined, reaching as low as 10% in the 2024 General Elections. Specifically, in the Lok Sabha, nearly 30% of MPs were young in the first general election, but this figure has fallen to less than 11% in the 2024 General Election. This decline is corresponded by the rise of average median ages of the MP’s, from 46 years in first election to 55 in the current Lok Sabha, and 63 in the Rajya Sabha. For the current 18th Lok Sabha, the average age of the elected members was 56 years, compared to 59 years in the 17th Lok Sabha. Presently, only 11% of Lok Sabha members are younger than 40 years, while close to 52% are above the age of 55.
The above problem is not centered to India and persists globally. According to the recent statistics of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the percentage of MP’s under thirty years of age is less than 3 percent, while MP’s under 40 years of age is less than 19 percent, signifying the lack of adequate youth representation despite them forming the majority population group.
It is also interesting to note that while the formal representation of the young in the parliaments around the world remains unsatisfactory, the young are raising their voices increasingly on digital platforms. Additionally, the political parties, although hesitant to give tickets to ‘new faces’, are never the less increasingly establishing the youth wings in the parliament and using their expertise in digital campaigning and digital outreach.
A Tale from the Past
The age of parliamentarians was also a matter of heated debate and discussion in the Constituent Assembly of India. Referring to the old adage, “wisdom comes with age,” Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and T.T. Krishnamachari advocated for having more experienced individuals in Parliament. They believed that only those with practical knowledge and experience should be elected to Parliament. However, this view was rigorously countered by other leaders, including G. Durgabai, H.V. Kamath, Shibban Lal Saxena, and Tajamul Hussain, who argued in favor of providing opportunities for young people as well.
Durgabai Deshmukh famously remarked, “Under new conditions, our boys and girls are very alive to their obligations and responsibilities, partly because of a broad education curriculum which sensitizes them to civic rights and duties. Thus, they should be given opportunity to come and serve as parliamentarians.” A consensus was eventually reached to lower the minimum age requirement, as provided under Article 84 of the Constitution of India.
The compounding problem
This underrepresentation, if not rectified promptly, could have significant and serious implications. Craig Berry writes that this “demographic deficit” in the country’s legislature leads to the marginalization of the young population within the demographic setup, and moreover, undermines the context in which the idea of representative democracy itself has developed.
This issue of marginalization has also been addressed by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. In its report to the Human Rights Council titled ‘Youth and Human Rights,’ it highlights how the young people, broadly falling in the age group of 15 to 35 years, have faced increasing curtailment of their socio-economic, civil, political, and cultural rights. Furthermore, the report underscored the urgent need to ‘strengthen’ youth representation in political discourse and at all levels of public policy decision-making.
While this marginalization continues, digital platforms like X, Instagram have become arenas of debates on youth issue that are often ignored in the mainstream politics. These debates and discussion help mobilize public support and spread awareness about the pertinent issues. It must, however, be emphasized that while this notable culture of digital activism might help mitigate youth concerns, they can in no way be considered an alternative to representation of the young in the National Parliaments.
Tracing the Dots: Why are Youths dissuaded from the politics?
It is paradoxical how despite being at the forefront of advocacy of various contemporary issues, they remain one of the marginalised groups when it comes to political representation. There are several factors that govern this trend. Some studies believe that lack of necessary political training and funding makes it difficult for the young people to navigate the labyrinthine pathways of politics. While others believe that the structure of the political system, which focuses more on aggressive campaigning than merit in the country, stifles the young talent. Lack of role models in the active politics for youth also plays an important role in making young people uncertain about the long term career in politics.
Some studies, particularly in Europe found that young people are more likely to engage in the non-institutionalized political activities like participating in protest and campaigns rather that engaging in voting and stand for a political office. Scholars like Henn and Foard, and Stockemer, theorized that in the traditional politics, the main discourse focuses on the mainstream issues rather than issue pertaining to the young. As a result, young feel more ignored and marginalised in the main stream politics. We can see this trend clearly in India as well, where some of pertinent issue like climate change are not adequately discussed, despite them being the pressing concerns especially for the coming generations.
Nepotism also acts as a factor that dissuades young talent from the National Politics. This is more so in the case of India where political parties are often accused of ‘dynastic succession’. One might argue that nepotism, as the term suggests, might bring up more young people. However, it does not necessarily lead to the effective representation of young concerns and aspiration in the Parliament and National Assemblies, as the elected leaders tend to elect their family members to further their political agendas, rather than giving chance to talented and outspoken individuals to put forth major issues concerning young.
It might also be considered that while the above structural barriers impedes the active representation of the young in the mainstream Political discourse, they are nevertheless carving space on digital platforms by fostering online campaigns and digital movements. This has led to increasing engagement in concerns pertaining to young, like climate change and digital safety among others to the forefront political discussions.
The Tangible benefits of Youth Participation
In any democracy, representation of the interests and aspiration of the various sections of the community is quintessential for its functioning. Speaking of this concept of Isegoria (freedom of speech for all), Benjamin Barber propounded that wider representation and active participation from all the section of the society is the foundation of a ‘Strong democracy’.
Adequate representation of the youth population can bring substantial benefits, not only for improving their socio-economic standing, but also for strengthening representative democracy itself. Kamila Kolodziejczyk hypothesizes that there is a positive correlation between youth representation in Parliament and voter turnout in general elections. Moreover, youth representation enhances participation at all levels of public decision-making, not just within legislatures, and further strengthens electoral trust. Moreover, it brings the diverse issues, especially pertaining to young to the discussion table and enhances the democratic process.
In the context of India, this increased participation is particularly advantageous. One might recall the fierce speech made by (then) young MP Jamyang Tsering Namgyal on the abolition of Article 370, passionately advocating for the rights and aspirations of the people of Ladakh. Similarly, Chandrani Murmu, the youngest MP in the 17th Lok Sabha at the age of 25, elected from the Keonjhar seat, has actively raised concerns about tribal welfare and the rights of indigenous communities.
Not only are young MPs at the forefront of raising crucial issues, but they play active roles in working of Parliamentary Committees. For instance, Ritesh Pandey, MP from Ambedkar Nagar, has served on various standing committees, including the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, and holds the distinction of being the youngest member to head a major national party.
It must be emphasized that young MPs not only bring fresh energy to Parliament but are also well-equipped to address emerging and pressing challenges. Many MPs, hold undergraduate degrees in STEM subjects, and some even possess postgraduate qualifications. Additionally, many have strong backgrounds in social service, bringing the same dynamism to their legislative roles. The credentials of these MPs counter concerns about their ability to manage constituencies and fulfill parliamentary obligations effectively. On the other hand, MP’s like Indra Hang Samba and Agatha Sagma have been at the forefront of bringing forth the specific regional issues that are often ignored in the mainstream politics.
Urgency of Affirmative Actions
Thus, the issues and advantages abovementioned, indicates an urgent need to remedy the dismal situation of the young/ youth representation.Many Scholars point towards the unexplained gap between the age of voting, i.e 18 years and the age of contestation, which is 25 years for the lower house and 30 years for the upper house. The debates in the constituent assembly sought to justify this on the basis that contestation requires more wisdom than being an ordinary voter. However, in the recent times, there has been a constant urge across the world to align the age of voting with that of age of contestation. Earlier, in a Rajya Sabha report titled“Specific Aspects of Election Process and Reforms,” the special committee proposed reducing the minimum age requirement for standing as a candidate for the house from 25 years to 18 years. This recommendation will go a long way to ensure the youth talent come into mainstream politics. Under the current Constitutional Framework, there is a requirement of a Constitutional Amendment under Article 84(b) for the implementation of the above.
Another method to enhance the participation is the implementation of young quota in political party nomination. In countries like Morocco, Rwanda, Kenya and Egypt, , political parties are obligated to distribute nomination tickets in a manner which reflects the different sections of the population, including certain candidacy to young people. However, the implementation of this measure has posed significant challenges. Often, political parties have hesitated to enforce the quota. Craig Berry writes that young politicians are typically at the bottom of the preference list for political party nominations. Parties tend to favor older, more experienced political players over young politicians, as they believe the former are better equipped to sway voters in their favor. Furthermore, as Pankaj Tripathi notes, even when political parties implement youth quotas, they often abuse them. For instance, young candidates are frequently given tickets to contest in ‘unwinnable constituencies’ under the pretext of ‘testing their mettle,’ rather than providing them with genuine opportunities to win and serve as legislators. However, if the political parties are committed, the measure can address the given problem. Under the Current framework, the major regulation of political parties is done under the Representation of People Act 1951 and by the Election Commission of India. Thus, the implementation of youth quota can be mandated by normal legislative amendment in the existing statues and administrative order, without the need of a constitutional amendment.
Finally, as provided in the abovementioned bill, some seats in the parliament can be designated to be reserved for young. Interestingly, the statement of objects and purpose of the bill provides that the candidates, who stood independently for the elections without any affiliation to a political party, shall only be eligible for the reserved seats. This will help address the concerns of nepotism and favoritisms in the implementation of the above measure. One might even question, that in case of constitutional amendment, it might face the scrutiny of the courts. However, the Supreme Court of India has time and again, most prominently in the case of Rajbala v State of Haryana, clarified that the right to vote and right to contest election are not in the nature of the fundamental rights but constitutional rights, and thus, the Parliament has the power to specify conditions for the same.
Conclusion: A further reinforcement
It is strange to note that while unemployment remains one of the most discussed and debated topic in the Indian Parliament, the victims of the same i.e. the young population remains absent during those sessions. Therefore, a positive affirmative action approach is imperative bridge the widening demographic deficit in the Indian Parliament. Moreover, the most pressing policy challenges of this century—such as achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, meeting the Paris climate targets, and addressing the ethical concerns surrounding artificial intelligence—are issues critical to the present and future of the younger generation. Thus, it becomes all the more pertinent to provide young people with a greater voice in decision-making and policy implementation across institutions, including the nation’s highest legislative authority. By ensuring their due representation, the country can harness their fresh perspectives, energy, and innovative outlooks. The aforementioned bill, which unfortunately received inadequate consideration despite its foresight, represents a critical step in the right direction.
