Frontline
October  2000
People's Verdict

Explosion in the ‘laboratory’ 

Results from zilla and taluka panchayat elections in Gujarat, considered Hindutva’s laboratory show a clear-cut rejection by the people of the communal experiment

BY SATYAKAM JOSHI

One state where the successful functioning of the panchayati raj system has been visible is in the state of Gujarat. High levels of people’s participation in the panchayati raj institutions (PRIs) in the normal course and during the election process have ensured the vitality of this institution, at present just five–years–old. For this reason, PRI election results have always been analysed as indicative of future political fortunes by pundits who even use the zilla and taluka panchayat poll results to predict the colour and hue of the ruling and opposition benches in the next state assembly.

The year 1995 was the first election ever of PRIs in the state of Gujarat. The BJP captured the zilla and taluka panchayats and ruled the PRIs for five years. Following this trend, two years later, in 1997, the BJP won the assembly elections and established its rule over Gujarat. For the first time in the state of Gujarat, both the panchayats and the state assembly were in the control of the BJP.

In 1995, the BJP had won 18 of the 19 zilla panchayats and 154 of the 183 taluka panchayats. The success of the Hindutva wave throughout the state, coupled with the dysfunctional state of the Congress — the traditional ruling party in the state — were the major factors behind this result.

The BJP came to power through a clever mobilization of rural voters on a full–scale Hindutva agenda, laden with false promises. After coming to power in the panchayats, however, the ruling BJP simply failed to fulfill even the barest minimum of its electoral promises — of generating employment and eradicating poverty.

Greater attention and time was concentrated on a divisive agenda, provoking people’s sentiments on religious lines, the important cases here being the violent communal riots in Dangs and other tribal areas of Gujarat during 1998 fomented between Christian and non–Christian tribals.

Similarly the cases of intra–religious marriages between Muslim boys and Hindu girls in rural Gujarat were converted by the agents of Hindutva into a communal issue. The BJP and other segments of the sangh parivar, like the VHP, BD and the RSS, took a highly communal and provocative stand that succeeded in terrorising the rural poor.

Simultaneously, in rural areas of the state, between 1995 and 2000, BJP’s elected representatives to the panchayats did not pay any attention to basic problems like poverty alleviation, creation of employment, providing basic drinking water and other facilities.

There were even cases at the gram panchayat level where Dalit women were elected as sarpanch under the new panchayati raj amendment, but not given power in any real sense. One of the Dalit sarpanchs of Matvad — a BJP ruled gram panchayat — in Navsari district of south Gujarat was not allowed to work. Besides, false cases were made against her as the land owning community was opposed to her pro–poor approach. Instead of favouring her, the state level leadership sided with the landlords. Such anti–poor stance of the BJP leadership became more and more visible over the past five years.

All the tribal areas of Gujarat, notified as a Scheduled Areas under the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution of India by the Scheduled Area Act, 1977, are spread over nine districts and 38 talukas and are home to 14 per cent of the state’s tribal population. The provision of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Area) Act, 1996 is applicable to the tribal areas of Gujarat too. In consonance with this Act, the Gujarat government passed the bill in December 1997 that applies to all tribal areas of the state. Under the provision of this Act, the local gram sabha needed to be consulted before acquiring land in any of the Scheduled Area for development projects.

Under this Act, it is also mandatory for the gram sabha to approve all plans, programmes and projects for social and economic development before they are taken up for implementation. The above procedure is to be followed even if the urgency clause is evoked. This bill was passed by the Gujarat assembly during the tenure of the Sankarsingh Waghela ministry. (Waghela had revolted and toppled the then Keshubhai Patel ministry and formed his government in 1996).

After the BJP returned to power in 1998, it did not take any interest in implementing this law. There were repeated demands from tribal leaders to implement it but the BJP high command never took them seriously. Where the gram sabhas managed to have their way, they restricted the operation of the sangh parivar and its cadres in completing their ‘unfinished business’ in tribal areas since a majority of the cadres belong to the urban areas.

It is a well–established fact that under the BJP–ruled regime in Gujarat, it is the RSS, the VHP and the Bajrang Dal who have been calling the shots, controlling both the panchayats and departments of the state government. It is functionaries of the RSS who dictate terms to elected representatives, so much so that without a go–ahead from the RSS, elected representatives have even been restrained from taking any decisions.

A widely known fact, oft–quoted in newspaper articles, was that ministers and presidents of taluka or zilla panchayats who did not belong to the RSS were under constant surveillance, watched and monitored by RSS men. Panchayat presidents and even ministers just could not take any decisions on their own. This caused acute dissatisfaction and anger, often displayed by the non–RSS BJP politician in public.

A glaring example was Babubhai Halpati, a tribal taluka panchayat president from the Umbergaon taluka of Valsad district in South Gujarat. Babubhai had been with the BJP since the 1980s and had worked painstakingly for the party, eventually succeeding in capturing the Umbergaon taluka panchayat in 1995. After coming to power, Babubhai tried working independently but the RSS and its workers interfered at every juncture. Babubhai, agitated with such an undemocratic style of RSS, reacted. However, the interference from RSS workers persisted and increased leading to his decision to quit the BJP. In the just–concluded election, he worked for Congress. There are many such examples in Gujarat.

The friction between the BJP and the RSS touched an all–time high leading to BJP cadres making open allegations against the state BJP president, Rajendrasingh Rana, state vice–presidents Suresh Gandhi and Amit Shah and party general secretary, Jayantibhai Kevat stating that they were hard–core RSS workers. The party brought over another staunch RSS leader, Sanjay Joshi, from Nagpur known for his unflinching pro–RSS views. Another important office bearer of the party, Gorthandas Zadafia, is an active member of the VHP.

These factors help to explain significantly the reasons behind the debacle of the BJP in the recent panchayat elections. Out of 23 district panchayats, which went to the polls in September, Congress captured 22 district panchayats. Out of a total of 735 district panchayat seats for which elections were held Congress bagged 519 seats while BJP managed to secured only 207 seats; 14 went to other parties. Similarly in the taluka panchayats, out of 210 taluka panchayats, Congress captured 160 taluka panchayats in the state.

There were a total of 3,848 seats out of which the Congress bagged 2,299 while BJP secured only 1,248. It was thus that the BJP was routed in the panchayat polls in the state.

Ironically, the Congress won by a thumping majority not due to its performance but due to the strong negative swing against the BJP. The rural voters of Gujarat are the major contributors to the BJP defeat. But, Congress is a divided house and intense factionalism still prevails

As we go to press, the BJP leadership is busy analysing its debacle and has constituted a committee to look into the matter. Apart from the super–imposition of the RSS–VHP cadres in panchayat affairs, widespread corruption and uncontrollable price hike are also considered to be important reasons behind debacle.

The rural poor are unable to cope with the price hike of grains and other essential commodities. Grain prices at the ration shop are at par with the free market, hence it is difficult for rural poor to survive. Corruption by party members is also a key reason for defeat. State jail and rural housing minister, Jaspal Singh has blamed corruption in high places as the main reason for the BJP’s debacle. Many panchayati raj functionaries are also openly saying this. A district panchayat account officer told this writer on condition of anonymity: "Corruption existed during Congress rule, too. But the level and manner in which the BJP leaders were involved in corruption is utterly mind–boggling. Even grass root level BJP workers had to bribe the higher level BJP leaders in order to get things done. The RSS–VHP cadres are extorting money from poor people. I have not seen this scale of corruption in thirty years of service in panchayat."

An optimistic reading of the voting trends and the results suggest that the BJP’s tactics of capturing power through communal politics has been understood, and even rejected, by rural voters. This combined with a rejection of the superimposition of RSS–VHP–Bajrang Dal cadres on the more liberal sections within the BJP has sent a clear message to the ruling BJP.

While the primary aim of the panchayti raj institution is to delegate more power to local people, under the BJP–ruled panchayats the power remained in the hands of the dominating few. The victory of Congress is not the victory of party but it is a victory of inherent secular-democratic fabric of Indians.

(The author is associated with the Centre for Social Studies, Surat).


[ Subscribe | Contact Us | Archives | Khoj | Aman ]
[ Letter to editor  ]
Copyrights © 2001, Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt. Ltd.