Political Process and Political Parties in India: Retrospect and Prospect

POLITICAL PROCESS AND POLITICAL PARTIES IN INDIA: RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT S.N. MISHRA AND SWETA MISHRA In their bid to explore the impact of nomination process, followed for election purposes by political parties in India, the authors analyse the trends that prevailed in our general elections since Independence. They identify in the process certain features, which, according to them, may have serious implications in future. THE DEVICE which offers citizens the opportunity to make choice among political parties or candidates and authorises them to rule the nation is called political process. Social scientists have interpreted this process in different ways. To sociologists, it is a monetary X-ray of social cleavage, thrust upon politics. To economists, it is a variant of maximising behaviour in the political market place. Accordingly for psychologists, it is attitude formation and choice behaviour. A political scientist will perceive political process as an educative opportunity, a process of legitimisation of power and a therapeutic exercise. In other words, it is an institutional device to ensure that the nature of political authority remains popular and the control on the misuse of power remains operative. Again, it gives opportunity to those who seek power and domination to do so through social channels and in the process oppose the social reality before the megalomania in human beings. Political process is a way to sort out the means and to chart the way towards the goal. It is an index and instrument of dynamics of democracy through which qualitative changes occur. It is one of the crucial indices by which one may attempt to measure as to how far democracy as a value has been internalised among the political elites and masses. Thus, it constitutes the mechanism for communication, influence and control from grassroots upwards. This mechanism involves both the political parties and voters: one . for materialising the public welfare programmes and the other for institutionalising the people's will. The heart beat of a democratic political system is largely regulated by the sound health of political parties. Political parties not only channelise the political process during elections through nomination and campaign but also set forth the political goal and provide incentives to citizens for political participation. 444 S.N. MISHRA AND SWETA MISHRA NOMINATION PROCESS OF THE ELECTION SYSTEMS The focus of this article is on analysing as to what extent periodic elections to Parliament and State Legislatures have set forth the process of parliamentary democracy on the right track; as to whether the emerging electoral trends are any indicator of stability and viability of our political system; as to whether elections reflect the institutionalisation of citizens' will;· to assess the extent to which our parliamentary system has sustained the test of the time; and, finally, if the answer is in .negative, to examine the measures required to be adopted to enable our political system to sustain emerging challenges flowing from criminalisation of politics, liberalisation of economy and erosion in administrative and judicial system. However, our effort is limited only to the nomination process of the candidates of different political parties and its effect on the status, stature and organisational soundness of our political parties. The process through which political parties authorise their candidates to enter into electoral battle for public posts based on people's consent is called nomination process. To put it differently, selection of candidates by parties is nomination and selection of candid.ates by the voters is election. Nomination is a supplementary but most crucial process of election. If election is a competition among political parties, nomination process is a competition within the party. One represents inter-party competition, another stands for intra-party competition. Through this competition, the inherent tendencies and attitudes of political parties are exposed to citizens. Through nomination process, political parties confine the choice of voters to the limited candidates and the motives behind the nomination of candidates pervade throughout the electoral fray and thereby affect the working of parliamentary government. It not only determines the number, quality and ideology of candidates appearing at the hustings but also shapes the main contours of electoral fray. To be precise, the emerging trends of Indian parliamentary system are to a great extent an outcome of nomination politics. For understanding the futuristic trends in our parliamentary system, we have to peep into the past. GENERAL ELECTIONS AND THE NOMINATION PROCESS Importance of Party High Command Democratic values, ideological commitment and integrity of the candidate ran supreme in the nomination process of political parties in three successive elections starting from 1952. All political parties (ruling or opposition) authorised only those candidates to contest the elections whose party allegiance, loyality, and ideological commitment was beyond doubt. By and large, these candidates were involved in freedom movement and had a good image of their own in public life. Congress Party, being the vanguard of freedom movement, enjoyed unquestionable popularity, and to get its ticket was a gate-pass of victory at the hustings. Hence, there used to be a neck POLITICAL PROCESS AND POLmCAL PARTIES 445 and neck competition among ticket seekers within the party. The selection process varied somewhat at different times, places and situations which occasionally allowed district and state party organisations to play their role. However, the central leadership generally used to exercise major influence. Since the procedural mechanism of conflict resolution was never properly internalised, the result was that each dispute tended to be channelled upwar~s involving intervention by party high command. As a consequence, most of the aspiring candidates devoted more time and made more effort to cultivate proximity to member (s) of party high command then concentrating on their constituencies and winning confidence of party workers and masses. As a result incentive for nursing the constituency got blunted. It further led to frustration and heart burning among the grassroots workers, who lacked access to the big bosses of the party. As a result the process of nomination left the organisation anamic at the base and prone to manipulation at the top. 1 Criterion for Ticket Allotment Thus, increasing interference by central leaders in the nomination process gradually denied the effectiveness of democratic functioning at the state level and below. Consequently, Congress was plagued with bossism. However, so long as Nehru was alive, bossism could not come in the way of democratic process of nomination as he always tried to maintain tiarmony among different units of party organisation. Inspite of the fact that his towering personality dominated the organisational wing of the party, he neither filled up the organisation with his sycophants nor silenced criticism of his actions. As regards nomination of Congress candidates for the First General Elections, he despatched a strong-worded circular to the party members, which not only reiterated the ban on groups inside the party but went further prohibiting any association of members with communal organisations and re'lfiring. men of progressiv.e social outlook to be chosen as the party candidates.. He gave due importance to constituency units in the selection of candidates and encouraged to bring popular and allegiant members in the electoral fray belonging to both right and left wings of the party. . During this period, Opposition parties, in the absence of.tough competition among the ticket aspirants, conferred tickets only on· those candidates who had their own standing in the constituency as also in the national and state politics through their social and political services. This was the period during which two major progressive forces, Socialist Party and Communist Party of India witnessed vertical splits in their ranks and gave birth. to Praja Socialist· Party, Socialist Party, Communist Party of India and Communist Party Marxist respectively and Akhil Bhar.tiya Jansangh was also gaining ground slowly but gradually. 1 2 Asoka Mehta, A Decade t1f Indian Pt1litics, New Delhi, S. Chand, 1984, p.7. W.H. Morris Jones, The Gt1vemment and Pt1litics in India, London, Hutchinson, 1971, p. 92. 446 S.N. MISHRA AND SWETA MISHRA Post-Nehru Developments However, in the absence of Nehru's towering personality, in the Fourth General Elections of 1967, Congress faced with internal quarrel and leaders of both the right and left wings of the party endeavoured to hold Congress command in their own hands even at the cost of party's ideology and integrity. In such a changing and confusing situation, central leadership which was at a time cementing force of their party organisation, weakened and became dependent on the ·faction-and caste-oriented. provincial leadership. In majority of provinces, these state leaders tried to manipulate the grant of Congress ti~kes in such a way that their facti?n co~ld do~inat .the ne~l elected legislature and they could, on that basis, claim chief mm1stersh1p: Sadique Ali, the then Congress General Secretary, confessed that while distributing tickets, the party had to take into account several factors which 4 This unprincipled did not give a representative character to the par~y. factional competition within the Congress led the national and state leadership to prepare their personal lobby through nomination process. A sense of complacency within leadership degenerated the ideological base of nomination politics and thwarted the party harmony and hegemony which ultimately resulted in establishment of regional political parties--Jana Congress in Orissa and Maharashtra, Janata Party in Rajasthan, and Lok Kranti Dal in Bihar. On the other hand, the growing concern and anxiety of opposition parties, to oust the Congress from power, led them to forge anti-Congress alliance and absorb the Congress left-overs in their parties. As a result, anti-Congress grand alliance deprived many competent party workers of the tickets in their respective constituencies and strongholds. No doubt, at the higher level, grand alliance partners were cooperative and accommodative but the lower echelons, particularly the deprived candidates, adopted the antagonistic mood to the authorised candidates. At the same time, the rural elite, emeorging in the wake of government-sponsored Community Development Programmes, felt alienated from the party as their claims were ignored either in favour of sitting MLAs or an imposed choice from above. All these i.rends eroded the ideological commitment and allegiance of party members. As a result, party membership became extremely vague and their Constitution became either non-existent or dead, leaving the way open for authoritarian dictates from the leading personalities and, ultimately, nomination of candidates virtually was a trial of strength among different personalities at the top. 5 In such a situation, leaving aside the party and the national interests, self interests of the legislators motivated them to commit 3Iqbal Narain, Twilight or Dawn: The Political Change in India (1967-71), Agra, Shivlal Agrawal, 1972, pp. 35-36. 4/bid., p. 34. 5L.N.Sharma, "Selection of Candidates by Political Parties in Bihar for Mid-term Parliamentary Poll 1971", Journal of Constitutional and Parliamentary Studies, Janurary-March, 1980. POLITICAL PROCESS AND POLITICAL PARTIES 447 political sin of defection, re-defection and counter-defection. In other words, the politics of "Aaya Ram-Gaya Ram" surfaced on the Indian political scene and the concept of strong Opposition and a stable government became only a distant possibility for India. Personalised Politics For a brief period ( 1971-77), trend towards non-ideological membership, immense increase in the number of defectors and emergence of Mrs. Indira Gandhi as unchallenged leader of the country, especially after the liberation of Bangladesh, provided scope for personalised politics in the guise of caste, creed, communalism and regionalism. In the elections of 1971, the nomination process of Opposition parties to some extent and Indira Congress to a great extent, was marked by individual dominance. The candidates who had proved their loyalty to the top leadership or had been in close contact of the top leaders, and belonging to the majority caste in the constituency were rewarded with party tickets. The party allegiance and id~olgca commitment of the candidates did not play a decisive role at the time of distribution of tickets. After the decisive victory of Mrs. Indira Gandhi in Jhe 1971 elections, the trend towards personalised politics became more visible and chief ministership of states did not remain confined to democratic process to be decided by representatives of State Legislature on the basis of numerical strength of the contesting candidates for the post. It was thrust upon the legislature party by the party high command. The trend afterwards led towards money-bag politics and use of muscle power. This was the period d·uring which Youth Congress (the youth wing of the Congress Party) emerged as a potential force. It was followed by excesses of internal emergency and infringement upon fundamental rights which ultimately resulted into JP Movement in Bihar and Nav Nirman Movement in Gujarat. The· success of Nav Nirman Movement in Gujarat and JP Movement in Bihar forced political parties to think in terms of polarisation of opposition parties to provide the nation an alternative to the Congress. However, in the elections of 1977, all the opposition parties were entrenched in personalised politics. Party leaders became more important than parties and nomination process was guided by individual allegiance rather than party allegiance. The Jan ta Party, which emerged in the wake of emergency, was an amalgamation of six parties whose top leaders, after the merger, tried their best to dominate the party. In their attempt of grabing the opportunity, they tried to manipulate the grant of party tickets in such a way that they could dominate over the newly elected Parliament and could claim the Prime Ministerial Gaddi. J.K. Baral, in a case study, found that one who was more powerful or close to those who were powerful within the party was beneficiary of nomination politics at the cost of another who normally should have got the ticket. 6 6 L.N.Sharma, t1p. cit. 448 S.N. MISHRA AND SWETA MISHRA Personql Affluence as an Important Factor Affluence of the candidate also played an important role in the nomination politics. As a result, while several deserving and competent candidates were refused tickets due to lack of financial resources several incompetent and undeserving candidates having criminal record to their names were rewarded with party ticket as they could mange huge sums of money not only for themselves but also for some other party candidates.7 This personalised politics even within the Janta Party led to its downfall in 1979 and polarisation decayed. In mid-term Parliamentary Poll of 1980, alongwith other prevailing factors, nomination politics tended towards encouraging family dominance in the political process of the country. Almost all the top leaders, with a few exceptions, successfully manipulated to reward with tickets their family members and close relatives without considering their ideological affinit!)' and political base or standing in politics. 8 This was the period of meteoric rise of Sanjay Gandhi at the top of effective political pyramid, the lumpens, which included emergence of a large number of persons, with a record of either criminal or civil offences, from the back stage and their entry into the political mainstream as MLAs, MPs and Ministers. Unpredictable Nomination Process In the Assembly Elections of 1980, selection of Congress(I) candidates had been far from traditional. The final arbitrator of the ticket distribution managed to distribute tickets in such a way that old bossism and factionalism could be thwarted giving way to evolution of some new equations a~d cleavages. In such a process, the so-called activists of Youth Congress were, by and large, proved to be ihe beneficiaries. According to the estimates of some party insiders, every fourth candidate in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan, overy second in Punjab, every fifth in Bihar, and every sixth in Gujarat entering the electofal fray had been involved with Youth Congress activities. 9 The Times of India called this as generational change and "India's cultural revolution''. As such, this time there was a marked departure from the usual pattern of selection of candidates as nobody could take nomination for granted. Nobody's entrenched claim seemed to have been recognised. Many of those who held seats in dissolved House had been ignored for some reason or other. 10 · According to political Pundits, there were no real issues in 1984 Elections, and a pro-Hindu, anti-Sikh backlash brought Rajiv Gandhi into power. But nobody really made a micro analysis of this hypothesis. After all, .,l1~i ~S1pthik Hi11d1m11n, January 20, 1980. T11d11y. December 16-31, 1979, p.72. lbul.. May 16-31. 1980, p. 35. /11dill Putrilw, May 19, 1989. 111N11rt/1em POLITICAL PROCESS AND POLITICAL PARTIES 449 1984, by all counts, was supposed to be a bad year for Mrs. Gandhi's era of decisive leadership which was, in a sense, coming to an end. And the opposition, splintered though it was, stood to gain a dramatic advantage. The post-assassination pro-Congress wave, a sympathy wave, as it were, was also a vote for stability, perhaps half of it. The other half, by many interpretations, was indeed an anti-Congress vote which, ironically, also went to Rajiv Gandhi because he appeared to represent action, change and cleanliness. And in a country, in which polit!cian had be~om a dirty word, it was a vote for a non-politician. By that account{ the 1984 mandate was also a public cry out against national drift and decay. 1 Under the circumstances mentioned above, the nomination politics in 1984 Elections did not set a new trend. It was, by and large, the same which was obtained during the elections of 1980. For the opposition parties too it was not a new trend setter as, due to sympathy wave ·in favour of Rajiv Gandhi, most of the aspirants for Janta Party or Lok Dal and for that matter even the Marxist Parties and BJP were lukewarm in trying to get the ticket. Resurgence of Old Nominational Criteria However, during the Elections of 1989-90, the gambler seemed to have folded his cards. The Mr. Clean of 1984 had acquired a new title in 1989, i.e., Mr. Safe. The return of old coterie to the fold indicated a return of wheelers-dealers and musclemen to the ruling party, and beginning of the ~nd of the reformist process Rajiv Gandhi had initiated in the winter of 1984.1 2 The more things appeared to be changing, the more they remained the same. The list of candidates showed that Rajiv Gandhi had realised that he could , not win on his own but needed regional bosses. Even a cursory glance of the Congress (1) candidates' list of 1989 reinforced the impression that party had closed on its President. Rajiv Gandhi had to go along in order to get along. . . The ne~ message was status quo and compromise. To pre-empt major dissent on election eve, the party had renominated over 80 per cent of its sitting MPs. This despite the fact that intelligence agencies sent depressing reports on the chances of dozens of MPs. Selection criteria established by the party, such as performance in Parliament during the past five years were thrown to the winds. And the party did not even dare touch some of its known dissidents. Also Rajiv Gandhi went back on his words that most of the AICC (I) General Secretaries and PCC (I) Presidents would not contest. Perhaps what most grotesquely symbolised this phenomenon was the nomination of Abdul Rehman Antulay from 'Bombay, and Kali Pandey from Bihar, both with besmirched reputation and dubious track records. Key groups wldch were targeted by the Congress (I) as new vote banks--youth for whom a Constitutional Amendment was passed lowering the 11 111dia 12 /bid. Today, November 19-30, 1989. 450 S.N. MISHRA AND SWETA MISHRA voting age, and women--who found themselves out in the cold. In the first list of 206 names, there were only 17 women, far short of Rajiv Gandhi's promised 30 per cent representation. The youth too did not do better. And many Youth Congress (I) activists, who had camped in the national capital (Delhi) for days urging party bosses for tickets, left bitterly disappointed. The-obvious advantage of the emerging electoral scenario within the ruling party had gone to what is known as the syndicate--the regional party bosses--whose power Raj iv Gandhi had· been trying to diminish. They demonstrated that the party's prospects--and the future of Prime Mjnister--depended on them. Since the Hindi heartland generally used to decide the fate of the ruler in South ~lock, the role likely to be played by Chief Minister N.D. Tiwar~ •. Bihar PCC (I) Chief Jagannath Mishra, former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Arjun Singh and Haryana's former Chief Minister Bansi Lal had been the subject of intense debate. Each having a power base, and a record. of serious differences with Rajiv Gandhi were shunted around at the Centre. All of them, on election eve, extracted their pound of flesh. 1977 Nomination Scenario To take into account the nomination scenario and election strategy of opposition parties, it may be mentioned that the announcement of election inspired the opposition to a rare display of unity. With a one to one contest against the Congress (I) probables in most of the constituencies, the opposition appeared to. be in an upbeat mood. The atmosphere, the faces, the vibes, were all familiar and so was the challenge. This time there was a difference from 1977 ,a new compulsion and a new mood. Suddenly, the gladiators of the opposition--who routinely spent as much time fighting one another as they did so fighting the Congress (!)--had been proi}elled into purposeful action. Rising above the cacophony of familiar claims and ambitions was a voice of reason they could ignore at their peril: this election was.the opposition's best chance in more than two decades except for 1977 after the Emergency. Despite many hurdles, opposition leaders finally managed to forge some kind of workable unity at national level. Unmindful of the fact that the 1977 bonhomie was nowhere in evidence.they agreed to give Rajiv Gandhi a straight fight at least in 80 per cent of the constituencies. · In reg,ard to nomination of c~ndiates, United Front partners took to manoeuvring and counter manoeuvring_ ~actis to extract maximum seats. BJP started the move and it was well-manoeuvred by the Janta Dal. Left parties also played their games well close to their chest. The-same 'thrust-and-parry' tactics characterised the manoeuvres of the different factional leaders within the Janta Dal who, smelling victory, were disinclined to rock the boat at least till the elections. Within the party, a truce of sorts had been achieved with Devi Lal, Chandra Shekhar and Arun Nehru, who functioned as proxy for V.P. Singh, emerging as the core group POLITICAL PROCF.SS AND POLmCAL PARTIF.S 451 deciding on the division of seats and nominations. Nehru worked as a fixer as well as a buffer. Armed with reams of data on the candida!es of previous elections, he put his past experience in distributing tickets to good use. At the same time, he subtly managed to balance the various groups, making sure that no one got too many seats and that V.P. Singh's interests were not compromised. · The very momentum of the changing political situation and the swift response forced the formation of some kind of command structure on the old patterns of the then syndicate of Congress Party. Accordingly, state leaders like Devi Lal and R.K. Hegde were given virtually a free hand in their states. In addition, Biju Patnaik was given charge of Orissa, Chimanbhai Patel of Gujarat and V.C. Shukla of Madhya Pradesh. Bihar was left to Devi Lal Loyalists, Lallu Prasad Yadav and Sharad Yadav. Arun Nehru handled. Uttar Pradesh directly alongwith Ajit Singh and Mulay.am Singh Yadav. Post-1989 Election Scenario After the elections of 1989, the political process in the country took a different tum and put a holocaust on the future of parliamentary democracy in our country. The Janta Dal Government, under the Prime Ministership of V.P. Singh, was not only short-lived but also led to the rise of devisive forces which threatened the unity and integrity of the country. Due to the hung character of the Parliament, the ruling partners tried to spread their tentacles in their own ways, for example, V.P. Singh, played the card of "sociai justice" and implemented Manda) Commission Report. To counteract it, the ~JP President, L.K. Advani _played the Mandir card. As such, the society was divided on the lines of 'Mandal' and 'Kamandal'. This also brought a new trend in Indian politics as the underworld appeared prominently on the political scene for and against the two issues. The 1991 mid-term elections were fought on three major planks--the Congress played its old card of stability and development, the Left Front--Democratic Front combine played the card of social justice, whereas, BJP rai:;ed the issue of Ayodhya Mandir. This strategy was clearly reflected in the nomination of candidates for the elections of Parliament and State Legislatures. Sadhtts, Backward Castes and Muscle Power In the list of BJP nominees, the activists of Vishva Hindu Parishad, Sad/ms and Sadhavis figured prominently. Similarly, the list of candidates of Left Front-Democratic Front combine was dominated by Backward Castes, Muslims, Schedules Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Congress again depended on the money and muscle power of the states' strongmen. The basic concern for political parties was to select such candidates who could match in money and muscle power of their counterparts. 452 S.N. MISHRA AND SWETA MISHRA IMPACT OF THE NOMINATION PROCESS ON ADMINISTRATION Looking into the nomination process of political parties in historical perspective what appears to be the rising phenomena are: corruption not only in high places but in the whole of the body politic, gangsterism, repression, institutional decay, politics of survival, personality cult, emergence of mafias and dadas, ·rise of fascism and erosion of the state. All these trends, mentioned above, are slowly but gradually subverting ou.r. administrative and judicial system, for example. the competent bureaucrats in Uttar Pradesh are being transferred and posted at the dictates of Mayawati and Kanshi Ram. 13 The same may be said in case of Bihar and oiher sta~. even the Centre is no exception. Similarly, the judiciary is also not left unaffected. The recent action of Bhajan Lal, Chief Minister Of Haryana, influencing the High Court Judge in 0.P. Jindal's case and annoyance expressed by the Supreme Court 14 are some of the burnin'g examples. It leads one to conclude that a conscious effort is being made by all the political parties, wherever they are in power, to politicise bureaucracy and. judiciary. Controversy in regard to the position of Chief Election Commissioner also leads in the same direction. Looking into the list of candidates who were given tickets by different political parties, it appears that criminalisation in politics will run supreme in coming future and mafias and dadas will gradually replace the dedicated and peace-loving candidates so far as party nomination for elective posts are concerned .. It also suggests that political ideologies and organisational base of political parties will have a backseat which is not good for survival and sustenance of our democratic polity. The po.litics. of expediency and self-survival in the nomination process has brought all the politicai parties to a stage where they have lost their homogeneous characters and institutional norms. If casteism, communalisnl and regionalism have disrupted the value-oriented and ideology-based compositjon of political parties, induction of hat changers and unscrupulous politicians has damaged their representative character. Political parties either in .power or in Opposition face a common threat in the form of militant movements of special interest groups, viz.. farmers, organised workers, students, communalists and regional chauvinists. These emerging trends have made political parties incapable of harmonising social conflicts, attenuate regional distance and protect collective interests. As such, they are badly failing in honouring people's wishes and aspirations . . Finally,. the analysis of nomination politics, since the first general elections, makes it quite· clear that political parties are failing to set forth the process of parliamentary democracy on right track and gradually becoming a she.lter house of self seekers and power seekers. The general elections have 13 The Time.f of India, New 14 /bid., August 12, 1994. Delhi, July 22, 1994. POLITICAL PROCESS AND POLITICAL PARTIES 453 so far failed in setting a sound mechanism of communication, influence.· and control from grassroots level upwards. They have also failed in institutionalising people's will. The emerging trends are also not indicative of stability and viability of a sound parliamentary system. Politics has become veritable_profession where all that matters is an elective seat. The ticket based patronisation and personalised party politics ·have destroyed the very raison d'etre of the election and have left the political parties in the position of a. by-stander. Thus, all the political parties and thereby the political system is under pressure of personalised politics which is not good for the sustenance of parliamentary system in India. In modest way, we would like to suggest that immediate steps are required to be taken up to check this phenomena because slowly and imperceptibly we are moving towards a new political dispensation backed by 11 new political ideology, which, if not countered decisively .and through united intervention of all° those who care for the country, will put an end to not only Indian democracy but possibly the Indian state as well.