Characters of political party in India

13 Jun Characters of political party in India

Posted at 13 Jun 2026 in PSIR Optional by Bijendra Jha 0 Comments

0 Likes

Characters of political party in India

Outcome of social movement: If we look into the emergence of political parties in India most of them are products of social movement. The National freedom struggle led by Indian National Congress emerged as the largest political party in post-independent India. However, the Congress Party was a large umbrella party consisting of diversity in leadership and social base. However, the working class movement had given birth to Communist Party of India. The regional party like DMK is the product of the social justice movement in Madras. Similarly the BSP and SP in Uttar Pradesh, JMM in Jharkhand, Assam Gana Parishad in Assam, Aam Aadmi party in Delhi.
One man army: Most political parties are headed by one dominant leader. Political personality and ‘cult of leader’ become a very common phenomena in the Indian party system. Often leaders mobilize people and the party is centered around a leader, consequently, there is a lack of checks to the leader who has become boss of the party like TMC, JDU, AAP, YSR Congress, RJD, DMK, SP and BSP. The party often creates a culture of ‘high command’ in which the order of the supreme leaders is implemented through the chain of command in the party. No one has courage to question the decision of the leader, if they do, sacked from the party itself.

The leadership role in electoral politics has transformed Indian elections like the US. Modi’s success and campaign style since 2014 national election has changed from parliamentary election to presidential election where two groups must present their decisive leaders to keep their view on economy, society and foreign policy before the electorate. The CSDS study shows that leaders like Narendra Modi have appealed to masses who believe that there is no alternative leader than Modi who can lead India. Such leadership roles are always important in the case of state level elections like Yogi Adityanath for Uttar Pradesh, Arvind Kejriwal in Delhi, Jagan Mohan Reddy or Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra Pradesh, KCR in Telangana and so on.

Political leadership has assumed a greater role in the Indian context since parties have largely converged on major policy matters, and differentiate themselves mainly on the basis of leadership style and performance. Further the advent of social media has facilitated the trend of growing importance of leaders who communicate directly with voters on the behalf of their parties which is also termed as the ‘presidentialization’ of parliamentary politics.

Dynastic rule: Kanchan Chandra finds that between 2004-2014 about quarter of MPs in the Lok Sabha, on average, have had a dynastic background. Most political parties in India are headed by either the son or daughters of the founder member of the Party. P K Chhibber (2013) argues that absence of Party organization, independent civil society and centralized financing system of the party and election has led to emergence and sustenance of dynastic parties in India whereas Kanchan Chandra (2016) argues that the organisational weakness of parties in India is a major cause of dynastic parties in India. Parties like Congress is the prime example of a dynastic party where the top leadership role has remained within the Nehru-Gandhi family. Many regional parties like DMK in Tamil Nadu, Samajwadi Party in Uttar Pradesh, RJD in Bihar, NCP and Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, JDS in Karnataka, YSR Congress in Andhra Pradesh, PDP and National Conference of Jammu and Kashmir where leadership role remained in the hand of one family members. On the other hand, there are parties which largely give opportunities to new leaders and avoid dynasties like BJP, CPI, CPM, JD (U) and others.
Lack of intra-party democracy: It is ironic that political parties play a very significant role in Indian democracy yet there is no democracy within the party-organization itself. Only few political parties hold internal elections on a regular basis to elect leaders at different layers of the party organization and most political parties do not hold election of the office bearer in the organization.

The question becomes important how a party which does not respect democracy within the party may play a significant role in democracy? How does it affect the functioning of democracy in India?

Take the example of one of the largest parties in India i.e. the Congress Party. When it was established, it held regular elections within the party to elect different political offices at district level as well at provincial level. It also held elections for the national congress and elected its head. In the post-independence, democracy within the party narrowed down during the Nehruvian period which reached its zenith at the time of Indira Gandhi who created the culture of ‘High Command’ which decided leaders of provincial congress. Chief Ministers were changed due to the will of the supreme leader running government at the Centre. There has been personalisation of power and de-institutionalization of politics and of public institutions. Internal democracy of the party eroded and finally evaporated in due course of time. Gandhi Family has become the cementing agent and core of the Congress Party. On the other hand, the other national parties like BJP or NCP are not different from the Congress in terms of intra-party democracy. However, both the Congress Party and the Bharatiya Janata Party have conducted regular elections, at least in the name of intra-party democracy, to elect its office-bearers, but leaders were already fixed to get elected in the process of internal election for leaders of organizations.

It is well noted that the leader based on personality cult remains all time head of the party like Mulayam Singh Yadav in case of Samajwadi Party, Lalu Prasad Yadav in case of RJD, YSR Congress and their importance increases when the party comes to power.

Low degree of institutionalization: Except the Bharatiya Janata Party and Left Party, most political parties have least institutionalization. In other words, BJP and Left parties are cadre based parties and their institutions are well organized at the local level. Rest all parties are mass-based parties as their leader manages votes through the mass appeal in their states.
Opaque in terms of their funding: This is one of the salient features in India’s political parties. Irrespective political ideology, political parties are opaque in terms of their political funding. The electoral bond has given safeguards in terms of donation to political parties.
Populist: Populism is not new in Indian politics. In the post-Nehruvian era, there is a new shift in Indian politics. Indira Gandhi gave the slogan ‘Garibi Hatao’ and appealed to the masses to vote in favour of the Congress Party. In the last few decades, political parties have engaged in competitive populism as we can see the poll promises of political parties and their leaders. Politics of freebies have become common these days and there is a new debate on ‘Revadi Culture’ in Indian politics.
Fairly representative in their social base: Most political parties are fairly representative in their social base. It means political parties select leaders from different caste blocs and they are supported from different caste groups.
Popular trust: Political parties have a lot of trust in India if we compare India with Canada or US or UK.
Moderately recent origin: Most political parties, except Congress Party, have recent origins especially regional parties of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, West Bengal, Maharashtra, and Assam. Indian National Congress, Communist Party of India, Justice Party, Akali Dal and National Conference are the oldest political parties in India which evolved in the colonial era. Rest all parties ruling in different states are recent.