People's Democracy

THE results of the recent polls to local bodies in Tamilnadu have generated mixed reactions all round. Comparisons are being made in two ways --- with the results of the assembly elections held in May this year, and with the results of the local body elections held in 1996.

The AIADMK has emerged as the single largest party in the latest elections, though its tally has somewhat declined in comparison to its performance in the assembly polls. The AIADMK failed to unite all the secular parties. Though the DMK improved over its assembly performance, it badly lost compared to its record win in the 1996 local body elections.

After the elections, the fact remains that the AIADMK holds sway in the election of chairpersons to the block and district panchayats. Out of the 6 corporation mayors, three are from the AIADMK and one from the TMC, taking the AIADMK-led front’s tally to four. Of the 29 posts of district panchayat presidents, 26 were won by the AIADMK-led front. Similar is the case with the posts of panchayat union chairmen. In the elections to the municipal chairmen posts, the AIADMK-led and DMK-led fronts are almost evenly placed --- the AIADMK front won 44 and the DMK front 42.

As far as the CPI(M) is concerned, as reported earlier, it held discussions with the AIADMK till the last minute; this left it little time for preparations for contesting independently. Nevertheless, when the decision to contest independently was taken, the party cadres were convinced about its correctness in the prevailing situation and were happy. This generated enthusiasm for carrying forward the work. The CPI(M) issued its own manifesto, highlighting the need of devolution of more powers and funds for the local bodies. Polit Bureau members R Umanath and Sitaram Yechury, state secretary N Sankariah and a host of state secretariat and state members participated in the campaign. The campaign was, generally, based on street corner meetings and some public meetings.

In very many places, caste and money power played a role in the elections. On the polling days, having failed to match the sophistry which the DMK used to rig the electoral process with or without the support of the police and administration, the AIADMK stood exposed with its crudest methods of booth capturing. It then resorted to rigging even at the counting centres in Chennai. The CPI(M) promptly condemned these undemocratic means adopted to capture power in the local body elections.

The post-election scenario, too, was filled with a lot of hectic activity of intimidating, buying and selling of elected candidates at the respective levels in indirect elections, in order to capture the posts of deputy mayors, vice-chairmen of municipalities, vice-presidents in town panchayats, chairpersons of district panchayats and panchayat unions.

In the final analysis, each of the AIADMK and the DMK won the number of seats enough to claim victory for them. The BJP, whom the DMK had allotted a number of seats, has made entry into new places where it was hitherto a non-entity. Making use of the newly formed smaller parties, the Congress was able to improve its tally over the last local body elections. Though the MDMK lost many of its sitting positions, it still maintained its strength. The PMK has literally been pushed behind others, contrary to its claim of being a party of the most backward classes and controlling the northern districts of Tamilnadu. Aligning with the AIDAMK, the TMC was able to win in a considerable number of constituencies, of course much less than its sitting seats. Though the CPI(M) contested alone, it won the same number of seats as it had won in 1996 when it had an adjustment with the MDMK. The CPI(M), on its own, won more seats than the CPI that was in alliance with the AIADMK and TMC. It was able to retain the only municipality it had won in the last elections, i e, Kuzhithurai in Kanyakumari district, with a big margin, and also won 11 out of 21 wards. Its candidates came a close second in the contest for chairmanship in the Chidambaram and Padmanabapuram municipalities. In the textile city of Tiruppur, it won 11 out of 52 municipal wards.

The CPI(M) played a crucial role in the victory of the AIADMK’s mayoral candidate at Coimbatore, where it defeated the BJP. Even in Madurai and Chennai, the voting pattern clearly proves that, had the CPI(M) been on the side of the AIADMK, the DMK could have been decisively defeated, and could not have won a single mayoral post anywhere in the state. True to its declared position, the CPI(M) supported secular democratic parties in all places wherever it did not contest. The victories of the CPI(M), that contested alone, have come as a shot in its arm. It has, in right earnest, already started its next stage of activity to fight for devolution of more powers to the local bodies as detailed in its manifesto.