CHENNAI: Like father, like son. The DMK functionaries are of late realising how untrue this ancient proverb could be. It has been four years since MK Stalin began enjoying virtually complete control over the Tamil Nadu’s main opposition party. For last three months, he has been officially the president of the party, since the demise of his father and late party supremo M Karunanidhi. Stalin might have stepped into his father’s shoes, but the path he is threading is making the 70-year-old party bear resemblance to that of Karunanidhi’s bitter rival J Jayalalithaa’s — or even MGR’s — AIADMK.
The changes are mostly going unnoticed amidst other political dramas in the state. But political observers say they are significant as they hold important lessons on internal party democracy.
One of the important aspects of Karunanidhi’s style of administering the party was a certain amount of decentralisation of power.
True that he silenced or threw away people — like MDMK chief Vaiko — who had challenged his authority, but the second-rung leaders, mostly district secretaries, were allowed a sphere of influence, and it was respected by even the party’s undisputed leader. The party functionaries, who had won the posts through internal elections, had a certain degree of guarantee for their position. Sudden removal of functionaries was extremely rare and in almost all cases, a due process was followed.
This is why it is said the DMK district secretaries often fancy themselves to be someone with as much influence as that of the district Collector.
A small anecdote is cited by the party insiders to explain this point. For the 1998 parliamentary polls, one TG Venkatraman had to wait at the office of K Ponmudi, secretary of the Villupuram district DMK unit, to get his nod for getting a seat for the Tindivanam parliament segment. The district secretary was the referring authority for the party’s MP ticket in that district and their opinions were given much weight. In 2001, MDMK is said to have walked out of the alliance because a few district functionaries were not willing to concede the seats in their district to the alliance partner, and the supreme leader Karunanidhi respected their opinion, and let MDMK walk out of the alliance instead.
These incidents now look like a memory from a distant era. Just a few months after he was elevated as the working president of the party, in May and June this year, Stalin removed 13 district secretaries from their posts and some of this was done under the pretext of redrawing the territories of the district units of the party. Besides, 45 town panchayat and panchayat union-level functionaries were also removed from the post without any reason being cited.
The moves are considered as very daring within the party and something most have never seen in their lifetime. But the message Stalin intends to send across his party is clear: He is not going to follow his father’s path, but thread his own and set his own rules.
Little opposition
There were indeed a few protests, like the recent one by Ramanathapuram cadre against removal of the district secretary. But given the enormous clout Stalin has within and outside the party, there are none who can challenge his actions, beyond the murmurs and some meek registrations of protest.
The recent actions of Stalin are only a reaffirmation that his intentions are clearly to redraw the power structure within the party. He has been appointing new functionaries for specific roles that so far belonged to the domains of the district functionaries or lower-rung functionaries. He has appointed 12 MLAs to oversee the verification of electoral rolls across the state. All these MLAs belong to the youth wing of the party, which has been controlled by Stalin for the last 37 years. Similarly, he had recently appointed two functionaries as in-charges for each of the 40 MP constituencies in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. They have been given the task of preparing the party for the upcoming parliamentary polls. Most of these 80 members too are from the youth wing of the party or those who recently joined DMK from other parties.
Speaking to Express, a former district secretary said: “Only three kinds of people are now dealing with crucial party affairs — those who served in the youth wing, those who supported Stalin during his tussle with Alagiri (Stalin’s elder brother dismissed from party in 2014) and those who recently joined from other parties on invitation of those close to Stalin.”
He says Stalin does not want to encourage people who had served the party for long and have a deep attachment to the basic ideals for which the Dravidian movement stood for. “For example, Mahesh Poyyamozhi, an MLA and president of Udhayanidhi Stalin’s fans welfare association, has been appointed as in-charge for Coimbatore MP constituency. V Karuppusamy Pandiyan, who joined the party recently, was put in charge of an MP constituency within a month of joining. These show that commitment to ideology of the party or experience no longer matters,” he said.
Another former state-level functionary draws attention to how the appointments were made by unilateral announcements, while they were until recently, done after a discussion in formal inner-party meetings at appropriate levels. “T R Baalu was made the principal secretary without any consultations with anyone. At least there should have been a meeting of the executive body on such decisions. But Stalin expects all cadre to accept his unilateral announcements just like Jayalalithaa did in AIADMK. This is not apt for DMK because this is a party of self-respect and has a system of internal democracy,” he said.
However, one of the newcomers who has been elevated to such a position said he saw the post as a mark of recognition from the party and welcomed it.
Different views
Outside the party, there are divergent views on the matter. While some political observers are concerned about internal party democracy, others say such a restructuring is important for Stalin to deliver electoral successes, something which the party needs urgently. Azhi Senthilnathan, a political observer, said, “DMK surely needs some electoral successes immediately. So Stalin may wish to revamp the party. But the manner in which it is being done is not correct. DMK has inner-party democracy and the party had been conducting elections for its functionaries. So Stalin can instead hold internal elections to revamp the party the way he wants.”
Tharasu Shyam, a veteran journalist, explains Stalin’s approach as a method to bring down the average age of the party’s functionaries. “It is a 70-years-old party. Hence, the party has large numbers of cadre and functionaries above Stalin’s age. After observing the reshuffling of the functionaries, it appears that Stalin wants the average age of the functionaries to be below his own,” he said. But he also warns that DMK is still a party committed to certain basic ideals and it is not good to fill it with people who have no commitment to the party’s ideals. “He can surely nurture the younger leaders for the next generation. But he must give space for the elders who are committed to the party’s ideals,” he said.
There are also a few who see Stalin’s actions are not going to help him much when it comes to electoral battles. “Electoral victories largely depend on alliances and national and state-level factors. Stalin must instead focus on delivering electoral successes so that his credibility grows within the party,” says Raveenthran Duraisamy, a political analyst, pointing that Stalin was not able to get electoral success for the party in the last four years.