Abstract
The rapid expansion of digital platforms has fundamentally transformed electoral politics, political communication, and democratic governance. Social media platforms increasingly function as quasi-public infrastructures that mediate political discourse, electoral mobilization, information distribution, and institutional legitimacy. However, the concentration of communicative power within transnational technology corporations has generated escalating concerns regarding disinformation, algorithmic amplification, political manipulation, electoral interference, and democratic polarization. This article comparatively analyzes digital political communication governance in the European Union and India, focusing on how distinct regulatory and institutional frameworks shape electoral integrity, platform accountability, and democratic resilience. Drawing upon comparative institutionalism, governance theory, media regulation scholarship, and digital democracy literature, the study demonstrates that platform governance outcomes depend upon the interaction between legal accountability mechanisms, regulatory capacity, political competition, and state-platform relations. The European Union has developed a rights- based regulatory framework emphasizing transparency, data protection, platform accountability, and supranational oversight through instruments such as the Digital Services Act and GDPR. India has adopted a more state-centric and executive-driven governance approach emphasizing sovereign digital control, intermediary regulation, and public order management within a highly polarized political environment. The findings reveal that both governance systems confront tensions between democratic protection and political
control, but institutional safeguards significantly influence the balance between accountability, freedom, and
regulatory legitimacy. The article contributes to politics and governance scholarship by advancing a
comparative framework linking digital communication governance, platform power, democratic
accountability, and electoral resilience.