Kesavan, a noted Historian, said that the idea of Controlled Democracy is a very old one and that it mirrors Macaulay’s vision of India as a democratic adolescent which needed to be raised to maturity before it could be properly democratic. He said that Controlled Democracy might even be called a euphemism for Pakistan. He quoted the example of the American system, which is critiqued for not making progress but has never been suggested to redo its constitutional system.

French, another noted Historian, said how India has become generally more prosperous down the years and how politicians have become less important, while people in business have become more important. He also pointed out to how politicians have become less co-operative with each other. He called India to be “hyper-democratic,” which is a good thing because there is a very high level of political engagement. This, however, leads to paralysis in policy making. He stressed upon the fact of how it all boils down to failure of leadership.

Ilmi said that Mohamad had “suspended 3 newspapers from publication and also curtailed the power of the judiciary.” She said how many people called Malaysia a “hard democracy” and “soft dictatorship.” She said how India needs more democracy because “We’re still evolving democracy as a concept.” She called Controlled Democracy an oxymoron. She also talked about “bad governance,” with no accountability and less transparency.

Thakur, the Editor of The Telegraph, said how the present condition of our country is the result of “bad executive behavior.” He called the Indian voter astute and how they have proven themselves in the elections. He also mentioned the importance of growing literacy levels.