(a) Though the army the most disciplined and corruption-free organisation in the country, however, it cannot be justified that they should rule the country. Primarily, because they do not form a democratic government i.e. are not elected by the people. Secondarily, people will not be allowed to voice their opinion or expression as all their fundamentals rights would be curtailed. Also, there would be no assurance that the army cannot turn into a ruthful dictator at any point of their rule, making the life of the people difficult. For example, the people of Chile suffered under the rule of General Augusto Pinochet.

(b) Such a thing would be against the principle of the Universal Adult Franchise, wherein every person above the age of 18 yrs in our country irrespective of religion, caste, sex, socio-economic background, etc. has the right to vote. Everyone has the right to participate equally in the formation of the government. Therefore ignoring some sections of society would be unfair. Moreover, wise men need not be necessarily good administrators.

(c) Those who say that the country should be ruled by religious leaders are making a very risky statement. Because in a multi-religious country bringing religion into politics can cause serious conflict among the people. Moreover, religious leaders can bring trouble to the country due to their mutual conflicts of ideologies. Besides, many even do not have any experience in administration. Thus, it is very necessary for them to run their own religious institutions and need not meddle in the political affairs of the country.