AAP on top in rural polls, but no room for complacency

The ruling party’s sweeping victory in the rural body elections has been a foregone conclusion since long, particularly after the 73rd Amendment (1992) gave constitutional status to Panchayati Raj institutions (PRIs) in India.

In Punjab, the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) was the runaway winner in the recent block samiti and zila parishad polls. Opposition parties such as the Congress and the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) made their presence felt in areas where local leaders wielded influence.

The AAP claimed that the mandate was an endorsement of the good work done by the Bhagwant Mann government since 2022 in rural Punjab and it would help the party retain power in the 2027 Assembly elections. However, the Congress and the SAD accused the AAP of indulging in high-handedness and misusing state machinery to win the elections.

The aim of establishing the three-tier Panchayati Raj system was to strengthen the democratic process at the grassroots level. Though the system was implemented in 1959, it did not have full constitutional validity before the 73rd Amendment in 1992.

Subsequently, it became a permanent, mandatory part of India’s democratic structure and incorporated in Part IX of the Constitution. However, devolution of powers to rural bodies has been mostly conspicuous by its absence, thus making them political tools in the hands of the ruling party.

The first block samiti and zila parishad elections in Punjab were held during the rule of the Beant Singh-led Congress government in 1994. Riding high after having rooted out decade-long terrorism in the state, the ruling party swept the elections. It was the first normal election in Punjab in the post-terrorism period.

The 1992 Assembly and parliamentary elections witnessed a very low turnout (23.50 per cent) due to the boycott by major Akali Dal factions and threats from terrorist organisations against people’s participation. The SAD, having a rural base, had contested the block samiti and zila parishad elections but failed to make a major impact. Rather, the party had levelled allegations of large-scale malpractices and accused the Congress of throwing all democratic norms to the wind to win those elections. The end result was the Congress’ rout in the 1997 Assembly elections — it could win only 14 seats against 87 in 1992. In the Lok Sabha elections in Punjab, the Congress’ tally dropped from 12 seats (out of 13) in 1992 to two in 1996; it drew a blank in the 1998 parliamentary elections.

The AAP performed below par in the 2024 parliamentary elections, winning only three seats despite being in power. Its performance in the urban elections was also dismal as it failed to get a clear-cut majority in the majority of the civic bodies. The party was desperate to reassert its dominance. No wonder it went all out to win the rural elections.

The party relied on brazen messaging during campaigning in rural areas, with slogans such as “AAP di Sarkar, AAP di Zila Parishad, AAP di Block Samiti — taanki sidha kam AAP de hath”. It was a message for the rural masses: vote for us or struggle to get your work done.

The ruling party made its intentions clear; in some cases, it was throwback to the SAD-BJP rule (2007-17) when halqa incharges were made extra-constitutional centres of power. The SAD had given them a free hand, which ultimately resulted in the political marginalisation of the party.

The outcome only reflects an assertion of power, not the eagerness of the people to endorse the work done by the government. The highhandedness will breed deep resentment among the rural masses. The ruling party may consider this victory as significantly pro-incumbency, but this is no guarantee of success in the Assembly elections.

A close look at these elections lays bare fault lines in state politics, particularly at the grassroots level. The allegations and counter-allegations have become an integral part of Punjab politics, ignoring the core issues and problems faced by the people of the state.

The entry of gangsters and candidates backed by gangsters and their success in some cases have raised disturbing questions about politics in Punjab.

Notably, the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB G-RAM-G) Act, which has replaced the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) as the flagship Central scheme for wage employment for rural workers, has been opposed by AAP, SAD and the Congress.

With a little over a year left for the Assembly elections, the AAP continues to grapple with several issues: deteriorating law and order situation, dissatisfaction among various sections of society, inaccessibility of some elected representatives, the financial crisis and the failure to meet the expectations of the people who had voted wholeheartedly for the party in the 2022 elections.

The influence of an unconstitutional power centre based in Delhi is also a matter of concern for the electorate. The unfortunate part of Punjab’s story in the post-Green Revolution era is ‘growth without development’, which is the result of dominance of the rural elite in politics. Political leaders and their parties are largely not keen on strengthening the democratic structure at the grassroots.

Factional politics without ideological commitment has also contributed to the degeneration of the political process in the state. The big question is: Whether or when will Punjab move towards a participatory political process?