By Gurnam Singh | Opinion |

In an age of political polarisation, institutional decay, and moral confusion at the apex institution of the Sikh Panth, namely the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC), one question continues to haunt and divide the Sikh community: Who leads the Sikhs? This is not a new question, but the urgency with which it now presses upon us demands honest introspection, historical clarity and a collective vision grounded in Gurmat. In this brief article, I seek to offer some clarity on this question as well as offering a way forward for building Panthic unity and vision.

Fall-out following the recent removal of Jathedars

While the question of Sikh leadership remains an ongoing and contested debate within the Panth, recent developments have reignited urgent calls for institutional reform. In the past year alone, the SGPC, already under scrutiny for its political affiliations with the Badal clan, orchestrated a succession of controversial dismissals and appointments across multiple Takhts.

In February 2025, Giani Harpreet Singh was removed as Jathedar of Takht Damdama Sahib. This was swiftly followed in March by the sacking of Giani Raghbir Singh, Jathedar of Akal Takht, and Giani Sultan Singh, Jathedar of Takht Sri Kesgarh Sahib.

In a bizarre tit for tat move, in May 2025, the Panj Pyare (five initiated Sikhs) at Takht Sri Patna Sahib publicly declared the acting Akal Takht Jathedar Giani Kuldeep Singh Gargaj, along with the Jathedar of Damdamā Sahib (Baba Tek Singh), as “tankhaiya” essentially finding them guilty of religious misconduct. This was in response to their decision to reinstate excommunicated Patna Sahib Jathedar Ranjit Singh Gauhar and the summoning of Patna’s key priests to the Akaal Takht.

SEE ALSO: Akal Takht, Takht Patna in Sukhbir Badal ‘tankhaiya’ squabble

These abrupt actions, taken without widespread Panthic consultation, have stirred anxiety among Sikhs in Punjab and across the global diaspora, many of whom view these changes as politically motivated.

The installation of new appointees, such as Baba Tek Singh Dhanaula at Damdama Sahib and Giani Kuldeep Singh Gargaj at both Kesgarh Sahib and in an acting capacity at Akal Takht, has been met with deep scepticism by a range of Sikh institutions and diaspora organisations.who argue that these appointments lack transparency and violate the collective spirit of Guru Panth. There is also growing concern about the SGPC’s continued authority to unilaterally appoint and dismiss Jathedars, treating them as mere functionaries of the committee rather than independent guardians of Sikh temporal and spiritual authority. The World Sikh Organization of Canada, for instance, condemned the removals as “politically motivated”, and the Damdami Taksal headed by Harnam Singh Dhumma and some sections of the Sant Smajh (Society of Saints) has questioned the legitimacy of the process, further underscoring a crisis of confidence in Sikh leadership.

These developments have sparked renewed debate about the original blueprint of Sikh governance, rooted in the dual authority of Guru Granth and Guru Panth, and whether the SGPC, is fit to oversee the highest religious offices of the Panth. The crisis has exposed deep fault lines within Sikh institutions, revealing tensions between Panthic sovereignty and state-influenced bureaucracy. If the institutions meant to safeguard the Sikh tradition are themselves seen as compromised, the Panth must ask difficult yet necessary questions: Who truly has the authority to lead? By what process should such authority be conferred? And above all, how can the spiritual and temporal integrity of Sikh institutions be preserved for future generations?

The SGPC and the Crisis of Sikh Institutional Authority

The SGPC controls arguably the two most sacred and therefore most important institutions of the Sikh community, both located in the same complex in Amritsar. We are talking about the Darbar Sahib (Golden Temple), which symbolises the spiritual heart of the Panth, and the Akal Takht, which represents the temporal authority of the Sikhs. It is the SGPC that appoints both the head granthi (priest) of the Darbar Sahib and the Jathedar of the Akal Takht.

What is particularly noteworthy, and often overlooked, is that the SGPC itself is constitutionally regulated by the Indian state. Formally established a century ago through the Sikh Gurdwaras Act of 1925, the SGPC emerged during the colonial period as a statutory body with a narrowly defined remit: the management of a limited number of historic Sikh gurdwaras in designated regions of British India.

The Act not only codified the SGPC’s jurisdiction over religious sites but also ventured into defining Sikh identity, a deeply problematic move for many, and laid out mechanisms for electing committee members, managing gurdwara finances and overseeing religious affairs. Over the years, some have described the SGPC as a ‘mini-Sikh Parliament’, though this description belies the extent to which its autonomy is constrained by legal and political structures, both colonial and post-colonial.

Authority and role of Jathedar of Akaal Takht

Against the backdrop of the fallout concerning the recent removals and sackings discussed earlier, a debate has been ensuing about the distribution and location of Panthic authority and leadership.

One of the most pressing issues is the question of who has the authority to appoint the Jathedar of the Akal Takht and what powers, if any, that individual should possesses. Should the appointment, role and function of the Jathedar be independent of the SGPC or must they remain subordinate to it?

Under the current constitutional arrangement, the Jathedar of the Akal Takht is effectively an employee of the SGPC, a reality that raises serious concerns regarding the independence and integrity of this revered office. The SGPC retains full discretion to appoint and dismiss Jathedars at will!

Those who defend the SGPC’s authority to hire and fire argue that the mandate for Jathedar’s is strictly confined to religious affairs and that extending their power and remit into political matters could endanger democratic governance. From this perspective, maintaining a clear boundary between religion and politics is seen as essential to prevent the entrenchment of theocratic power in an individual, something that in Sikhi can only be given to the Guru. However, critics counter this view by invoking the original and distinctive vision of Sikh sovereignty articulated by Guru Hargobind Sahib through the concept of miri-piri, the seamless integration of temporal and spiritual authority. From this standpoint, they argue, the role of the Akal Takht is not to be apolitical, but rather to serve as a moral and political compass for the Sikh Panth, independent of state or party control.

This tension between bureaucratic control and spiritual sovereignty, which has been a feature of other faiths, most notably Christianity and the ruptures during the reformation from the 16th Century onwards, lies at the heart of the current debate within Sikhi. As Sikh institutions continue to grapple with questions of legitimacy, representation and autonomy, the status and authority of the Jathedar must be re-evaluated. This means not only considering the call for reforms to establish its independence from political patronage and corruption, but to consider if the model we are seeking to reform, which after all, was established in the early part of the 20th Century by the British, is in line with Gurmat principles.

Guru Panth and Guru Granth

The current fascination with the figure of the Jathedar of the Akal Takht and his supposed resemblance to the Pope in Catholicism reveals a dangerous drift from the egalitarian foundations of SikhI. The Akal Takht, established by Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji in 1606, was never meant to be a seat of clerical absolutism. The sovereignty lay not in the building or the throne but in the Guru himself.

At the heart of the matter lies a fundamental disjuncture between the original blueprint laid out by the Guru Granth Sahib and Guru Panth, and the current, state-defined framework of religious governance. The time has come for the global Sikh community to seriously reflect on whether institutions such as the SGPC, established in a colonial context and arguably co-opted in postcolonial India, are fit for purpose in the 21st century.

Indeed, following Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji, no subsequent Guru sat on the Akal Takht. Yet the Guru’s leadership of the Panth continued unbroken, culminating in the revolutionary act by Guru Gobind Singh Ji, who vested temporal and spiritual authority in Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Guru Panth.

SEE ALSO: The Truth of The Akal Takhat 

This dual Guruship constituted of a scripture that speaks divine truth and a collective that deliberates in light of that truth, offers no space for papal-style infallibility. In fact, it radically decentralises authority and places sovereignty in the hands of the collective Sangat, as guided by Gurmat. It was no other than Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhi who gave us a vision was of a community of conscious, sovereign individuals. As Bhai Gurdas assets:

ਮਾਰਿਆ ਸਿਕਾ ਜਗਤਿ ਵਿਚਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਪੰਥੁ ਚਲਾਇਆ॥
“In the world, Guru Nanak established his authority and set in motion a pure path (Nirmal Panth).”

It must be noted that this desire to spark a spiritual and ethical revolution and not an endorsement of charismatic individuals or inherited titles. It was a call for a society of centred on ethical living, critical reflection, equity and collective responsibility. Guru Nanaks vision of an egalitarian and spiritual utopia is perfectly captured in a Shabad by Bhagat Ravidas Ji that speaks of Begampura, the city without sorrow. (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, p345)

ਬੇਗਮਪੁਰਾ ਸਹਰ ਕੋ ਨਾਉ ॥ ਦੂਖੁ ਅੰਦੋਹੁ ਨਹੀ ਤਿਹਿ ਠਾਉ ॥
ਨਾਹਿ ਤਸਵੀਸ ਖਿਰਾਜੁ ਨ ਮਾਲੁ ॥ ਖਉਫੁ ਨ ਖਤਾ ਨ ਤਰਸੁ ਜਵਾਲੁ ॥੧॥
ਅਬ ਮੋਹਿ ਖੂਬ ਵਤਨ ਗਹ ਪਾਈ ॥ ਊਹਾਂ ਖੈਰਿ ਸਦਾ ਮੇਰੇ ਭਾਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
ਕਾਇਮੁ ਦਾਇਮੁ ਸਦਾ ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹੀ ॥ ਦੋਮ ਨ ਸੇਮ ਏਕ ਸੋ ਆਹੀ ॥
ਆਬਾਦਾਨੁ ਸਦਾ ਮਸਹੂਰ ॥ ਉਹਾਂ ਗਨੀ ਬਸਹਿ ਮਮੂਰ ॥੨॥
ਤਾਮਿ ਸਹਸਿ ਨ ਸਹਸ ਗਵਾਇਨ੍ਹ੍ਹਿ ॥ ਜੋ ਹਰਿ ਭਾਵੈ ਸੋਈ ਪਾਵੈ ॥
ਨਿਹਚਲ ਨਿਜ ਘਰਿ ਬੈਠਾ ਕੋਇ ॥ ਰਵਿਦਾਸੁ ਜੁ ਰਾਮੈ ਰੰਗੁ ਰਤੋਇ ॥੩॥੫॥

Begampura, the name of that city. There is no suffering or anxiety there.
There are no taxes or cares, nor any wrongdoing. There is no fear, blemish or burning grief. (1)
Now I have found a beautiful abode, in that city, all is well, O brother. ||Pause||It is an eternal, sovereign realm, there is no second or third; all are equal there.
It is ever prosperous and renowned, The wealthy and the contented dwell there. (2)
They do not suffer from loss or misfortune, there, one receives only what pleases the Divine.
Some sit in the immovable state of self, Ravidas, immersed in the Love of the Divine, dwells there. ||3||5||
Crisis of Sikh Institutions

Despite the clear vision of ethical governance and living provided by Gurbani, today, many of our institutions have strayed far from that original vision. Whether it is the frequent appointment and removal of Jathedars in Amritsar or the political factionalism in diaspora gurdwaras, the signs of decay are plain to see.

We witness widespread mismanagement, nepotism and a failure to invest in people. Sacred spaces have become arenas for ego-driven conflicts, electioneering, and control over resources. Donations offered in seva are often used without transparency, long-term planning, or alignment with the Guru’s mission.

Too many of our gurdwaras prioritise marble over mental health services, gold domes over grassroots education, and carpets over capacity-building. In contrast, well-run institutions spend over 50% of their income on staff, training, operational systems and development because, without this, no institution, no matter how grand, can serve its community effectively.

Along with dysfunctionality, it has been exactly 100 years since the establishment of the SGPC, and we have seen little or no reform or evolution of the body. This is quite remarkable given the changes that have and are taking place, not least the spreading of Sikhs to the for corners of the globe and the partition of Panjab. If the SGPC was a truly functioning mini parliament, it would have managed to reform itself, but clearly, given the control of the Indian State, any reforms will be difficult to implement.

The Way Forward

The Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, born in the context of British colonial rule, was a landmark achievement in its time. It designed to wrest control of Sikh gurdwaras from corrupt mahants and vest it in a democratically elected body, the SGPC. While it may have served the Panth well in the early 20th century, this Act is now widely regarded as anachronistic, restrictive and structurally unfit to address the complex political, spiritual and global realities of 21st-century Sikh life.

Today, the Sikh Panth stands at a historic crossroads. With over half of all Sikhs now living outside India, the continued dominance of India-centric institutions like the SGPC and the Takhts, whose functioning is increasingly compromised by partisan politics and state interference, has led to institutional dysfunction, confusion, and a deepening crisis of moral authority. These bodies, once envisioned as vehicles for unity and service, now risk becoming symbols of division and inertia.

In this moment of reckoning, the call for a Global Sikh Parliament (GSP) was never more prescient. Such a project should be underpinned by both political and spiritual imperatives. Not only are our institutions broken, but many have also fortaken the Guru for their own ego driven aims. The mission of a GSP must be provide the Sikh community with a collective voice rooted in the timeless principles of Guru Granth and Guru Panth. By embracing these principles, we not only honour the legacy of Guru Hargobind Sahib, but we also move closer to realising Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s dream of a Panth united in love, courage, wisdom and a collective vision.

(See comments at Asia Samachar Facebook and Instagram)

Gurnam Singh is an academic activist dedicated to human rights, liberty, equality, social and environmental justice. He is an Associate Professor of Sociology at University of Warwick, UK. He can be contacted at Gurnam.singh.1@warwick.ac.uk

* This is the opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of Asia Samachar.

RELATED STORY:

Akal Takhat Jathedar: SGPC consultation on qualifications, conditions of service (Asia Samachar, 1 May 2025)

The Truth of The Akal Takhat (Asia Samachar, 8 April 2025)



ASIA SAMACHAR is an online newspaper for Sikhs / Punjabis in Southeast Asia and beyond. You can leave your comments at our website, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. We will delete comments we deem offensive or potentially libelous. You can reach us via WhatsApp +6017-335-1399 or email: asia.samachar@gmail.com. For obituary announcements, click here