SWAMI DIVYAGYAN
Ranchi, Nov 3: As Jharkhand gears up for the upcoming Assembly elections, dissent is brewing within the Congress Party. Accusations have surfaced alleging that the ticket distribution process has overlooked long-time loyalty and competence in favour of economic influence, with senior Congress leader K.C. Venugopal even facing direct questions on this matter from party members. This issue, though it may seem local, has exposed deeper fractures within the party’s structure. Given the present challenges in Jharkhand’s political landscape, one can’t help but question whether wealth and external influence are unduly swaying the distribution of Congress tickets.
Prominent among the voices of discontent, Congress leader Umashankar Akela publicly claimed that he was denied a ticket because he couldn’t pay Rs. 2 crores, a serious assertion that reveals underlying ideological and internal conflicts within the party. Such grievances hint at a broader systemic issue, where economic power seems to outweigh commitment and hard work, leading to a growing sense of disenchantment among the party’s dedicated workers.
Several controversial decisions have surfaced regarding ticket distribution, casting doubt on the party’s image. For instance, in Panki, a ticket was awarded to a candidate who recently joined the party, sidelining a well-established candidate who had been diligently working there for years. This move implies that the longstanding contributions of loyal party workers may no longer hold significant value within the Congress. Instead, newcomers with strategic or financial leverage seem to gain favor quickly, highlighting a shift towards prioritizing influence over tenure—a trend that could have damaging, long-term consequences for the party.
In Barhi, the sitting Congress MLA was overlooked in favor of a newcomer who joined only two years ago, sparking further resentment among the party’s old guard. Political analysts believe that such decisions could send a negative message to the public, potentially undermining the Congress’s standing in Jharkhand. Similarly, in Dhanbad, ticket allocations led to significant backlash when a ticket was granted to an outsider while bypassing dedicated local aspirants. These issues reflect a pattern not only confined to Jharkhand Congress but also seen in broader Indian politics, where external pressures and financial clout often disrupt internal party structures.
One notable aspect of this ticket allocation debate is the growing prevalence of “electoral funding” and “cronyism” in Indian political parties, where dedicated grassroots workers are frequently sidelined. Studies show that caste equations, regional influence, and economic power are increasingly dictating candidate selection in most political parties. In Jharkhand Congress, these decisions—seemingly influenced by wealth and external factors—pose a risk to the party’s traditional organizational framework and long-held values.
The decision in Kanke, where the ticket was given for the fifth consecutive time to a candidate who has consistently lost the past four elections, also raises questions. Several senior party workers are beginning to wonder if the leadership’s decision-making genuinely reflects the intention to select capable candidates or if it’s driven by other motives. It appears that the Congress may have overlooked the “winning candidate” criterion in favor of internal party politics and personal preferences. This is somewhat paradoxical, as “anti-incumbency” remains a crucial factor in Indian politics, where repeated losses by the same candidate often harm the party’s image.
Political experts argue that these internal issues in the Congress stem from structural problems within the party’s organizational framework and decision-making process, which often lack transparency and impartiality. Veteran party leaders in Jharkhand have voiced concerns that individuals who have been carrying the Congress banner for 30-35 years were ignored this time around. This pattern of overlooking senior, experienced leaders in favor of new faces—regardless of political experience—is common in Indian politics, though it frequently damages party unity and morale.
Ultimately, the ongoing conflicts within Jharkhand Congress are bound to influence its performance in the upcoming elections. Party workers are now questioning whether the leadership genuinely values their years of loyalty and hard work. If Congress’s top brass does not address these issues promptly, this dissatisfaction could significantly impact the party’s electoral outcomes in Jharkhand. Furthermore, it may tarnish the Congress’s reputation nationally, especially when accusations of selfish motives, wealth-based influence, and external pressure loom over the party’s policy-making process.
At this juncture, Congress faces a critical challenge: rebuilding trust with its base in Jharkhand. Can the party institute a transparent and merit-based approach to ticket distribution? This question is not just essential for Congress but for all political parties that seek to honor the contributions of their long-serving members while striving for a brighter future.
