It is true that the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) has grabbed more seats than the CPI (M)-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) and, thus, the results entitled the UDF to form a government. But an accurate estimation of the election results in the state shows that the political base of the LDF has expanded.
It is notable that the LDF vote share was 41.95 per cent during the last Lok Sabha elections, held in 2009, but it rose to 42.46 per cent during the local bodies’ elections in 2010. Moreover, the LDF vote share further increased to 45.13 per cent in the recent Assembly elections. Thus, the LDF has registered a significant increase of 3.18 per cent in its votes, compared to the parliament elections in 2009. This time the voting difference between the two was of a paltry 155,571 votes, and the overall result was that while the UDF got 72 seats, the LDF captured 68.
Another momentous feature in this election is that the CPI (M) has emerged as the single largest party in the state Assembly in terms of the number of seats and voting share. The traditional perception that the biggest ruling party would be the single largest party in the state assembly has, thus, been altered. The pro-people performance of the erstwhile LDF government has been the major factor in increasing support for the party. Combating the Central government-sponsored neo-liberal policies, the LDF government rendered relief to the people with its alternative policy. Also, the LDF was indisputably unified and fought the elections in a cohesive manner.
On the other hand, unlike the LDF, the UDF was not in a position to function as a cohesive force due to its internal tussles. In the initial stage, after the merger of the Kerala Congress (Joseph) with the Kerala Congress (Mani), the tussle was on which was the second largest party in the UDF. After the merger, the KC (M) claimed the second position in the UDF, while other UDF constituents opposed its claims openly. Their squabbles further aggravated during the seat-sharing negotiations. The Congress and Socialist Janata parties openly fought each other to stake their claim for the Chittoor Assembly seat.
While the UDF constituents mutually fought one another, internal fights in the Congress that leads the front also gained momentum. After declaring the KPCC president’s candidature in Delhi, opposition leader Oomman Chandy openly turned against Ramesh Chennithala, the KPCC president. K K Ramachandren, a Congress leader and former minister in the erstwhile Oomman Chandy ministry, openly came out in a press conference with corruption charges against some former UDF ministers.
The latest disclosures in the notorious ice cream parlour case, too, came just prior to the Assembly polls; these disclosures were by the brother-in-law of Kunhalikkutty, a leader of the Indian Union Muslim League. These generated a first-rate crisis and dispute in the Muslim League. After the conviction of a former UDF minister, Balakrishna Pillai, in the Edamalayar corruption case by the Supreme Court, people were apprehensive that the formation of a government by the UDF would aggravate corruption in public life.
The LDF successfully raised these issues before the people during its election campaign. The election rallies, which LDF Chief Minister V S Achuthanandhan addressed, were significant for the enormous participation of the general public. This campaign helped the LDF to expand its support base.
More From This Section
The corruption scams that surfaced at the national level were also debated vigorously in the Assembly campaign. It was at that very time when a renowned Gandhian, Anna Hazare, began his hunger strike in Delhi, demanding the enactment of a Lok Pal Bill — which the Left forces in the country have been demanding for long. The media focus on Hazare’s hunger strike made the people realise the murky depths of corruption in the country, when the prime minister himself was not spared. The UDF tried to attack the LDF on the lottery issue, which was maliciously fabricated for the elections. But its campaign faced a serious setback after the Central government filed an affidavit in the high court, exposing the UDF’s double standards. In sum, the UDF found itself in a position of defence during the campaign. It took recourse to money power to manipulate the mandate. In many parts of the state, it tried to influence the voters by using plenty of liquor. Moreover, it had clandestinely distributed an illicit magazine, called The Crime, which carried unethical stories. The LDF, on the other hand, stood steadfastly in the campaign with its principled position.
Excerpts from an article by CPI (M) Kerala leader Pinarayi Vijayan in People’s Democracy, the CPI (M)’s organ, on June 5