The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) emerged as a political force in India, promising clean governance, transparency, and a commitment to addressing grassroots issues. The wave that engulfed Bharat during the India Against Corruption movement under Shri Anna Hazare found a political eddy forming in the national capital; an eddy which funnelled into the very power corridors that the movement had so vehemently criticized. Kejriwal had become the voice of reason, just misplaced it seems, in retrospect. This voice was seen by cross-sections of the electorate as a refreshing change. A change from career politicians, dynasts and those running after political clout for the sake of it. A change for those who would address longstanding problems faced by the populace. But what came instead was an age-old tool manoeuvred by politicians since generations: populism. Some scholars regard Akbar’s Din-e-illahi as a populist bid to rally support from both Hindus and Muslims, while the Britishers allowed the formation of the Indian National Congress to let largely moderate Indian voices to do not much other than writing letters to the British Parliament for some relief from the atrocities of the Raj. In both instances, either fairly quickly (as in the case of Din-e-illahi, which had a little more than a dozen courtiers as followers) or over time (with the growing irrelevance of the Congress in a Bharat that is decolonizing, slowly but surefootedly), the result always has been failure. The bubble that the Aam Aadmi Party tried to create also had to burst, and burst it did, in a furious outflux of scandals and irregularities. Kejriwal was implicated in a liquor excise scandal, while many of the top leaders of the party remain in jail. The curious events that have led to where we are today, in states like Delhi and Punjab, have led me to coin two words: ‘populysis’ and ‘freebruption’. ‘Populysis’ combines `populism’ and `paralysis’, succinctly capturing the transition from populist rhetoric to policy stagnation, while ‘freebruption’ merges `freebies’ and `disruption’, highlighting how excessive giveaways can lead to fiscal instability or fractures. Both these would, unfortunately, be characteristics we can associate with the Aam Aadmi Party governments in Delhi and Punjab today.
The party’s flurry of freebies and populist measures have helped them retain power in states like Delhi and Punjab. But the key question is: at what cost? A deeper analysis reveals significant flaws in its governance model. These shortcomings often stem from an overemphasis on populist measures at the expense of institutional strengthening and sustainable reforms. World over, populist activism has always struggled to translate into effective governance structures. Hugo Chávez’s populist regime promised to empower the marginalized and redistribute wealth through social programs. However, his governance led to increased executive power at the expense of democratic institutions. Over time, Chávez’s administration suppressed opposition and civil society, ultimately resulting in a political crisis characterized by economic mismanagement and authoritarianism. The Five Star Movement (Movimento 5 Stelle – M5S) in Italy emerged as a populist force promising to disrupt traditional political structures and address citizens’ grievances. While it gained significant electoral success, M5S struggled with internal cohesion and governance once in power. The party’s lack of experience in managing complex governmental processes led to policy inconsistencies and difficulties in coalition-building, ultimately undermining its initial appeal and effectiveness. The list goes on and on, and in there, we can now safely add the Aam Aadmi Party.
In Delhi, AAP’s governance has been characterized by a focus on welfare measures and populist policies, such as free electricity, water subsidies, and flagship programs like Mohalla Clinics and model schools. While these initiatives have garnered public support and international attention, they often mask deeper systemic issues that remain unresolved. One of AAP’s defining features is its emphasis on providing free services to citizens. For instance, The Delhi government allocated ₹3,250 crore for power subsidies in the 2023-24 budget, with an additional ₹100 crore added later, bringing the total to ₹3,350 crore. This reflects a significant increase in the subsidy budget over the years, which has risen from ₹2,405.6 crore in 2019-20 to nearly ₹3,350 crore in the current fiscal year. While many consumers benefit from these subsidies—especially those using up to 200 units of electricity per month, who pay no bill—those consuming more than this threshold face higher tariffs. The PPAC is a surcharge that helps cover fluctuations in power purchase costs for distribution companies (discoms). Recent increases in coal and fuel prices have necessitated higher PPAC rates, which can range from 6.75% to 8.75%, ultimately impacting non-subsidized consumers more heavily. The Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) has maintained a uniform tariff structure, but adjustments such as the Power Purchase Adjustment Cost (PPAC) have led to increased costs for consumers who do not qualify for subsidies, Similarly, the party’s free water policy allows residents to use up to 20,000 liters per month at no cost. However, this policy has resulted in significant revenue losses for the Delhi Jal Board (DJB), which reportedly faced a debt burden exceeding ₹15,000 crore as of 2023. While these subsidies provide immediate relief, they divert essential resources from critical infrastructure development, such as modernizing sewage systems or improving water quality. The long-term economic sustainability of these measures remains questionable.
The Mohalla Clinics program has been celebrated as a revolutionary step in accessible healthcare; however, ground reports highlight significant challenges. Many clinics face shortages of essential medicines, staff, and diagnostic facilities. For instance, patients with conditions like hemophilia have struggled to obtain life-saving injections, leading to distress and confrontations at healthcare facilities due to the unavailability of critical drug. Patients often leave clinics without necessary medications, receiving only prescriptions or notes instructing them to purchase drugs from private pharmacies, which many cannot afford. Many clinics operate with a shortage of doctors and support staff. Reports indicate that several medical officer positions remain unfilled, leading to overwhelming patient loads—some clinics see up to 150 patients daily with inadequate staffing. Clinics frequently lack basic diagnostic facilities, forcing patients needing tests (like MRIs or ultrasounds) to seek care at larger hospitals, which can be inconvenient and time-consuming. Essential items for treatment, such as plaster for fractures or even basic medical supplies, are often unavailable, further complicating patient care. The list of 109 free medicines provided at Mohalla Clinics does not cover all necessary ailments. The list of essential drugs is also restrictive for doctors because sometimes they cannot prescribe better-suited salts or medicines not on the list. Critics have argued that these clinics prioritize visibility over substantive healthcare reform, as Delhi’s larger public healthcare system continues to grapple with inadequate funding and overcrowded hospitals. Medical data is also not properly maintained. In 2020, Praja, a nonprofit organization, submitted an RTI request to identify the ten most reported diseases at Mohalla Clinics, but by February 6 of that year, only three of Delhi’s eleven districts had responded. The report emphasized that effective disease surveillance requires standardized patient record-keeping across all clinics, as discrepancies in data reporting were noted among the districts.
Despite some improvements in Delhi’s education sector, significant challenges persist that severely undermine the quality of education. A critical shortage of qualified teachers is one of the most pressing issues, with the Delhi government currently facing a deficit of approximately 1,000 Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) positions, as only 283 PGTs are available to serve over 9,500 students with disabilities across 609 government schools at the senior secondary level. This shortage is symptomatic of a broader national crisis, where over one million teacher vacancies exist across India, particularly impacting rural areas where some schools operate with as few as one teacher for multiple grades. The consequences are dire: in the 2023-24 academic year alone, over 100,000 ninth-grade students in Delhi failed their annual exams, alongside more than 46,000 students in Class 8 and 50,000 in Class 11. Furthermore, the overall enrollment in Delhi government schools has decreased by over 30,000 students compared to the previous year, attributed largely to perceptions of poor educational quality and inadequate facilities. These systemic issues—coupled with high student-to-teacher ratios that often exceed 47:1—hinder personalized instruction and contribute to a cycle of underachievement and disengagement among students. Addressing these challenges is essential for restoring confidence in the public education system and ensuring equitable access to quality education for all students.
In Punjab, AAP’s victory in 2022 was seen as a significant milestone for the party; however, governing this state presents a more intricate challenge compared to Delhi. Punjab’s fiscal crisis, entrenched agricultural issues, and complex socio-political dynamics have revealed the limitations of AAP’s governance model. Punjab is facing a serious financial crisis, with its debt-to-GDP ratio projected to exceed 50% in the near future. As of 2024, the state’s debt is estimated to reach approximately ₹3.74 lakh crore, which constitutes more than 46% of its Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) of over ₹8 lakh crore. This figure places Punjab among the most indebted states in India, with reports indicating that its debt-to-GSDP ratio is among the highest in the country. The financial situation has been exacerbated by various factors, including substantial government subsidies and a heavy reliance on borrowing to manage existing debts. For instance, Punjab’s government has been criticized for increasing its debt burden significantly since the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) took power, with allegations that the debt rose by ₹50,000 crore within just 18 months of their administration. Additionally, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has highlighted Punjab’s precarious fiscal health, noting that it ranks among the top five most indebted states nationally and has one of the highest per capita debts. The state’s ongoing financial challenges have led to calls for a bailout from the central government, although experts question the feasibility of such assistance given the high levels of debt already present. The state’s financial health is among the worst in India, with a debt-to-GDP ratio exceeding 50% as of 2024.
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has faced significant criticism during its tenure in Punjab, particularly concerning its welfare schemes and governance challenges. The introduction of the free electricity scheme, which offers up to 300 units per month at no cost, has led to a dramatic increase in domestic connections, with nearly 90% of households receiving zero electricity bills. While this initiative has garnered popularity, it has also resulted in substantial financial strain on the state’s resources, with projected subsidy costs expected to reach ₹21,909 crore by 2024-25. This figure includes ₹10,175 crore allocated for agriculture, raising concerns about the sustainability of such populist measures amid Punjab’s already precarious fiscal situation. The reliance on these welfare schemes has contributed to a growing revenue deficit, projected at ₹24,000 crore for the upcoming fiscal year. Critics argue that AAP’s focus on freebies detracts from essential reforms needed in the agricultural sector, which is facing a severe crisis. The state’s farmers continue to struggle with high debt levels, with institutional debt reaching ₹73,673 crore by 2023. Despite promises of support, reports indicate that 14 farmers committed suicide within just 50 days of AAP taking office, highlighting the ongoing agrarian distress that the government has failed to adequately address. Additionally, law and order issues have escalated under AAP’s governance. Rising drug trafficking cases and communal tensions have raised alarms about the effectiveness of the administration in maintaining peace and security. Regional complexities have also posed challenges for AAP, particularly regarding water-sharing disputes with Haryana.
A common thread between AAP’s governance in both states is its reliance on populist measures rather than institutional reform. While welfare schemes yield short-term political gains, they often fail to address systemic issues’ root causes. For instance, despite promises of transformation in urban infrastructure in Delhi, persistent problems such as poor waste management and air pollution remain unaddressed due to inadequate investment in sustainable urban planning. The disconnect between activism and governance is another critical aspect of AAP’s challenges. The party’s activist roots emphasized immediate action and public mobilization; however, this focus has not effectively translated into governance. The preference for high-visibility projects often undermines robust governance frameworks. Despite professing a commitment to decentralization, AAP has done little to empower local governance structures such as municipal bodies in Delhi or panchayats in Punjab. In fact, centralization of power has been a hallmark of AAP’s governance model in Delhi. Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s office wields significant control over decision-making processes, often sidelining bureaucratic procedures and expert opinions. This became farcical when Atishi kept the CM’s chair vacant after taking oath as Chief Minister of Delhi, in what seemed like a perversion of the selflessness of Bharat in forsaking the throne and yet administering Ayodhya, in Shri Ram’s absence during his exile. This centralization has led to inefficiencies and delays in governance. The ongoing conflicts between the Delhi government and the Lieutenant Governor further underscore the challenges associated with this centralized approach. Not to mention, the amazement I felt when I came to know, while inquiring for some aged relatives, that Ayushmaan Bharat is not applicable in Delhi. The only other state that has not implemented this important national scheme is West Bengal, under Didi. For AAP to establish itself as a credible national alternative (which it so desperately seeks to be), it must bridge the gap between its activist origins and governance realities by shifting from short-term populism towards long-term institutional strengthening focused on sustainable economic policies and robust administrative frameworks. It has to move beyond the famous communist party line that they will not be a party-in-government, even if they could – a ‘historic blunder’ according to Jyoti Basu. The irony here is that the AAP has staked claim to form the government, and yet its heart or intent is not quite in meaningful governance, it seems. Without this realization, AAP risks being perceived as prioritizing optics over substantive outcomes—ultimately leaving behind a legacy characterized by missed opportunities for genuine governance reform.
