The Samajwadi Party (SP) developed ugly fissures with uncle pitted against nephew, son taking on father and governance gone to sixes. It showed the lack of inner party democracy. Most other major parties have the same fault lines. Parties like the Shiv Sena, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, the DMK, the AIADMK, the Trinamool, the RJD, and the Janata Party (Secular) are run on personal lines. Elections lead to the choice of a leader by consensus. During the state and general elections candidates are chosen by the ruling party leader. Akhilesh Yadav has said that Mulayam Singh Yadav, the party patriarch, will decide who the candidate for the office of chief minister will be in 2017. It is an internal matter. But what about the quality of the candidates? The country needs a model about the choice of candidates and their constituencies. The ruling clique should not be allowed to call the shots. The election commission demands that party functionaries should be elected. Of course, in most cases a consensus is achieved about the choice of a candidate. Reforms have been suggested by various committees advocating inner party democracy.
Political parties decide on the spending of public funds and frame laws. That makes institutionalized inner party democracy all the more necessary. Leaders should decide on most matters but those who elect them should also have a role in decision making. The family struggle in the Samajwadi Party exposes a sordid saga in Indian politics.
