THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Although the CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) has scored an emphatic victory in the just-concluded Assembly elections, the defeat of key leaders of constituent parties and several candidates of the CPI(M) has resulted in considerable heartburning among the allies and rival factions in the CPI(M).

The talk in LDF circles is that at least half-a-dozen more seats would have been the LDF's for the asking if behind-the-scene manoeuvring and factional undercurrents had not taken a toll on the fortunes of key LDF leaders and CPI(M) candidates. The RSP has already made known its suspicions about foul play by the local CPI(M) leadership leading to party State secretary T. J. Chandrachoodan's defeat in Aryanad and decided to seek probe by an LDF committee into the issue. The CPI leadership is quite perturbed at the defeat of its State assistant secretary K.E. Ismail in Pattambi. The Janata Dal (Secular) is also sore about the defeat of its senior leader K. Krishnan Kutty in Chittur. The CPI and JD(S) are likely to take up the issue with the LDF leadership only after a closer examination of the voting figures at the local level.

In all the three constituencies, the LDF leaders have been the victims of erosion of CPI(M) votes. While there is the feeling that in Aryanad, it is the electoral aspirations of one or two local leaders that put paid to Prof. Chandrachoodan's hopes of reaching the Assembly and, probably, the LDF Cabinet, there is a nagging suspicion among RSP leaders that there might more to it. Prof. Chandrachoodan has been quite forceful in articulating his views on current political issues and had caused considerable embarrassment to sections of the CPI(M) even as he targeted the Congress and the UDF. In his case, LDF votes in such CPI(M)-dominated panchayats as Uzhamalackal and Kuttichal did not get polled as expected whereas he was able to cover considerable distance in Kattakkada, where the UDF is quite influential.

Mr. Krishnan Kutty's case is also not too different. He did not get the expected votes in the LDF strongholds such as Nalleppulli, Kozhinjampara and Perumutty panchayats. According to JD(S) sources, in Nalleppulli, he polled only around 3,000 of the expected 7,000 votes. If the LDF votes had got polled in accordance with the calculations submitted by the campaign managers, he would have won by at least 10,000 votes. Eventually, he lost by 2,012 votes. The JD(S) leaders, just as the RSP leadership, suspect that something went wrong after the final calculations were submitted and frozen on poll eve.

In Mr. Ismail's case, trouble arose mainly in Shornur municipality and Muthuthala panchayat, both firmly in the grip of the LDF. In both these places, he should have secured a margin of at least 2,500 votes each. What shocked him and the rest of the campaigners was that the UDF forged ahead in several of these LDF-dominated areas.

In the case of the CPI(M) candidates in Nemom, Kazhakkuttom, Varkala, Harippad and elsewhere, it was apparently factionalism that played truant with their fortunes. It apparently cut both ways and the party candidates here were unable to use even the apparent pro-LDF wave to keep their heads above the swirling factional waters. The local level party committees have already begun closer analysis of the voting figures to identify what went wrong and where. What has made the process easier is the use of electronic voting machines that enables booth-wise evaluation of the polling behaviour.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail