In the recent assembly elections, the CPM was shaken by its humiliating defeat in the red citadel of Kannur, especially in Payyanur and Taliparamba where two ex-CPM leaders – V Kunhikrishnan and T K Govindan – openly challenged the party and emerged victorious. In two separate conversations with TNIE, they list out strikingly similar reasons for CPM’s setback: a lack of inner-party democracy, an overarching fear among cadre to speak up, and autocratic tendencies.
Excerpts
The Taliparamba defeat was a major setback for CPM...
My victory from Taliparamba was against the anti-democratic activities in the party. Inner-party democracy is the most vital element of a communist party. What happened there was a complete violation of inner-party democracy. The people’s mandate was a protest against this.
What led to the issue there?
The state secretary tried to enforce nepotism in candidate selection. The party secretariat, the district committee, and all the lower committees opposed the candidature. All leaders including (M V) Govindan were aware. When such opposition arises, the practice is to change the candidate. When it wasn’t done, there was fierce anger among the people. I said if the party didn’t correct, I would go to the public. The people stood with me.
The then chief minister, Pinarayi, claimed not a single person in the district committee proposed T K Govindan’s name...
What Pinarayi said is technically correct. They made a right decision in the beginning, that a female candidate should contest from Taliparamba. Naturally, my name wouldn’t come up. I’ve been with the party for 60 years; I never wanted to enter the electoral fray. I did so in sheer defiance. I contested as a protest against the sheer arrogance of the stance ‘If not me, then my wife’.
Does the fact that she happened to be the wife of M V Govindan make her ineligible? She too has a long history of party work...
Her biggest ineligibility is that not a single person accepted her. If a party unit discusses and rejects someone, isn’t that the biggest disqualification?
Are you saying P K Shyamala’s candidacy was solely M V Govindan’s decision? Such a decision wouldn’t happen without Pinarayi’s knowledge…
There is no doubt that Pinarayi and Govindan took this decision together. Pinarayi usually attends meetings where election matters are discussed. But he didn’t attend this particular meeting. Though different opinions came up, district secretary K K Ragesh sent only Shyamala’s name.
That itself is political betrayal. I firmly believe that had Pinarayi been in that meeting and witnessed the massive opposition, this decision wouldn’t have been passed.
Why do you think Ragesh did that?
Ragesh is someone who listens to whatever Govindan says. I don’t think Ragesh has the capability to make independent decisions or to lead a district unit like Kannur. He has no experience doing so. He hasn’t even been a branch secretary. Whose nominee is Ragesh?
After the colossal drubbing, there have been heated discussions in committees. Do you see any real possibility of a corrective course of action?
The party has conducted course correction exercises before. Those were mere verbal exercises. I don’t believe any correction will happen this time either. Even after the UDF sweep, the party didn’t learn a lesson. They should realise that people detest the leadership from top to bottom. It’s useless to brush this off as ‘minority consolidation’. It was the party’s very own – area committee members, party unit workers, and party members – who voted for me.
CPM usually gets good support from many panchayats in Kannur...
The party’s setup there is almost like a religious organisation. No one can get out of it. Similarly, people within the party cannot publicly take a stand against the party. If they do, they will face massive opposition and social isolation.
Is CPM heading towards a Bengal/Tripura-like scenario?
Definitely. There’s resentment among the people. I don’t wish to see the CPM destroyed, especially in Kerala. If the CPM is destroyed, the social equilibrium itself will change. If the CPM doesn’t wish to be destroyed, it must correct itself.
Was it only during the election that you realised the extent of degradation?
My quitting the party was not a momentary decision. I have been continually discussing such matters within the party
But they don’t listen. When one is in power, there’s a feeling everything can be controlled using power. When a situation arose where discussions about dynasty politics and the like were completely ignored, I decided to register my protest.
For over 50 years, you were part of a movement that opposed the Congress. Do you feel a prick of conscience?
There was mental distress... but no prick of conscience because I consider what I did to be absolutely right. My friendships and relations built over 60 years are all within the party. I will remain a communist. To be a communist, one doesn’t have to be in the CPM. I will continue the communist lifestyle and uphold communist values. I will die as a communist.
In an interview you mentioned how you became anxious seeing Pinarayi trailing in the initial rounds this election…
Yes. Pinarayi is undeniably the most powerful and formidable leader in Kerala CPM. Perhaps he is the primary reason the CPM has managed to move forward unbroken for so long. He has contributed the most to hold it together.
But isn’t he also a leader who is viewed as the root cause of the party’s recent setback?
I don’t agree with the idea that Pinarayi is the sole reason for the setback. Pinarayi certainly has his share of the blame. However, it’s a collective failure of the CPM. For instance, this concept of ‘family rule’ (nepotism) should never be allowed to exist within a communist party.
Why is it that no criticism comes up within the party?
I have raised constructive criticism within the party. Once I criticised M V Govindan Master severely. I said, ‘I don’t like your speech, Master. That is not how a speech should be.’ A major argument took place between us. He said he would stand by his position. Both of us started political work together. We were in the same committee. We shared good camaraderie. But when he attained a higher position, and when such criticism cropped up, he may have developed enmity towards me.
There were some who supported you in the party, like E P Jayarajan…
EP was not in favour of me contesting. But EP has some dissatisfaction. There is no chance of him quitting. But due to the dissatisfaction, he has grown a bit apart, that’s all.
Many believe that had Kodiyeri been alive, such issues wouldn’t have happened…
Certainly. Had Kodiyeri been there, neither Taliparamba nor Payyanur would have happened. Kodiyeri would have been able to address all such dissatisfaction. His approach was humane… unlike the language of arrogance we see today.
You visited Kodiyeri’s house recently. Does the family have some kind of dissatisfaction?
It cannot be termed dissatisfaction, but a grievance. When Kodiyeri’s mortal remains were brought from Madras (Chennai), the family desired a public homage in Thiruvananthapuram but the party decided against it.
Kodiyeri’s wife said she doesn’t consider you a betrayer, as termed by the party…
Many in the party’s rank and file too believe the same. In fact, it was (M V) Govindan Master who indulged in class betrayal, imposing a candidate without a party decision. I opposed it; does that make me a class betrayer? They accuse me of parliamentary ambition. A three-time MLA wanting his wife to become an MLA... isn’t that parliamentary ambition?
Would a two-time chief minister, contesting a third term, amount to parliamentary ambition?
Pinarayi is the only leader in CPM to lead a government. As a political leader he is someone who can face any crisis and move forward in the CPM. Who else is there?
But when Pinarayi’s decisions become party’s decisions, isn’t that an issue?
Even strong leaders tend to err occasionally. He should have shown more interest in taking decisions based on inner-party discussions. Instead of taking decisions based on discussions at the grassroot level, things have come to a state where a few people gather around him and take decisions based on what Pinarayi says. In reality, Pinarayi was unable to accurately grasp the spirit of discussions at the grassroot level.
What kind of correction is needed? Should M V Govindan step down?
He should quit as secretary, owning responsibility. If disciplinary action is taken against leaders responsible for the defeat, it’ll generate more trust among the masses. The current style of functioning should change. Unless this arrogant approach is changed and a people-oriented approach is imbibed, the status quo will be maintained.
You are silent about Pinarayi continuing as leader of opposition...
(Smiles) Who else can be LoP other than Pinarayi? In this time of crisis, only Pinarayi can lead the party. But he too should change his style of functioning. Communist party has a collective leadership, but individuals too have their importance.
TNIE team: Cithara Paul, M P Prashanth, Anil S, K S Sreejith B P Deepu, Albin Mathew (photos)