The Features of Political Parties in India

This is the single most examinable feature, because it is where Michels's iron law of oligarchy at chapter 100 is confirmed most exactly, and because it is what the Tenth Schedule makes consequential: if the party's direction binds the member's vote, then whoever controls the party controls the legislature, and nobody elected that person.

6. Ideological convergence

Across the major parties the differences of economic programme are narrower than the rhetoric suggests, and coalitions have repeatedly been formed between parties whose declared ideologies are opposed. The competition is often about who will govern rather than about what will be done, and about which social coalition is assembled rather than about doctrine.

The honest qualification. Convergence is not identity. There are real and persistent differences on federalism, on the place of religion in public life, on language, on reservation, and on labour and land.

7. Money

Elections are expensive, and parties depend on contributions whose sources have historically been opaque. Chapter 860 examines the law on political funding and what the courts have done with it.

8. Legal power over members

Since 1985, a party's whip on a confidence motion or on a matter integral to its electoral programme binds its members on pain of disqualification. Facts and holding: Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu, 1992 Supp (2) SCC 651, is set out at chapter 780; what matters here is the consequence, that a party in India possesses a legal hold over the votes of legislators that parties in many other democracies do not have.

9. Weak membership organisation between elections

Most parties mobilise intensively at elections and are much thinner in between, with organisational work concentrated in the hands of office bearers and of whatever social organisations are affiliated to them.

What causes these features

An answer that explains rather than lists is a stronger answer, and four causes account for most of the list.

Diversity. A society divided by language, religion, caste and region will produce parties organised on those lines, and no electoral system prevents it.

The electoral system. First past the post rewards concentrated support, which is exactly what regional and community parties have, and it penalises parties whose support is thin and spread.

The absence of any legal requirement of internal democracy. Registration under section 29A requires an allegiance clause and not a functioning internal election, so nothing compels parties to be democratic inside.

The cost of elections, which makes parties dependent on those who can supply money and reduces the influence of members who cannot.

A worked example

A State party formed twenty years ago by a popular film actor holds thirty seats. Its president is the founder's son. Candidates are selected by the president. It has never held an internal election. It is in a coalition with a national party whose declared economic programme it does not share.

Which features does this display? Regional; personalised; family led; internally undemocratic; ideologically flexible; and, in a coalition, functioning as an interest group with seats.

And what does the law say about each?

On internal democracy: nothing. The Representation of the People Act requires registration and an allegiance clause and does not require an internal election.

On candidate selection: nothing. It is entirely a matter for the party.

On the members' votes: the Tenth Schedule. The thirty members must vote as the president directs on any confidence motion, on pain of disqualification.

Put those three together and the feature that matters becomes visible. The party's president was elected by nobody, selects the candidates, and controls thirty votes in the legislature by force of law. That is not a criticism of any particular party; it is a description of what the combination of no internal democracy and the Tenth Schedule produces, and it is the best thing a student can say on this topic.

Distinctions that carry marks

What these features are NOT

They are not peculiar to India. Personalisation, weak internal democracy and dependence on money are found in most democracies; what is distinctive is the combination and the legal power the Tenth Schedule confers.

They are not all defects. The rise of regional and community parties gave political power to groups that had been excluded from it, which is an achievement of Indian democracy and not only a problem for it.

Ideological convergence is not the absence of difference. Federalism, religion in public life, language, reservation, labour and land divide the parties genuinely.

And weak internal democracy is not illegal. No Indian law requires a party to elect its own officers, which is the point of the topic rather than an omission from it.

Quick revision

1. Nine features: a multi-party system with very many registered parties; national and State parties as a legal classification; regional, caste and community parties; personalisation and political families; weak internal democracy; ideological convergence; dependence on money; legal power over members under the Tenth Schedule; and weak organisation between elections.
2. The feature that matters most is the combination: no legal requirement of internal democracy, plus a whip that binds on pain of disqualification, means whoever controls a party controls its votes in the legislature, and that person was elected by nobody.
3. Four causes: diversity; first past the post, which rewards concentrated support; the absence of any legal requirement of internal democracy; and the cost of elections.
4. Michels at chapter 100 is confirmed exactly by Indian party organisation.
5. Regional and community parties are both a sectional appeal and the route by which excluded groups obtained power. Give both readings.
6. Convergence is not identity: federalism, religion, language, reservation, labour and land divide parties genuinely.

Test yourself

1. State the principal features of political parties in India. A multi-party system with a very large number of registered parties, most of which win nothing. A legal classification into national parties, State parties and registered unrecognised parties. The prominence of regional, caste and community based parties. Personalisation of leadership and the prevalence of political families. Weak internal democracy, with internal elections rare and candidates chosen centrally. Ideological convergence, the programmatic differences being narrower than the rhetoric. Heavy dependence on money from opaque sources. Legal power over elected members under the Tenth Schedule. And thin organisation between elections.

2. What causes these features? Diversity, since a society divided by language, religion, caste and region produces parties organised on those lines. The electoral system, since first past the post rewards geographically concentrated support, which regional and community parties have, and penalises parties whose support is thin and widely spread. The absence of any legal requirement of internal democracy, since registration under section 29A requires an allegiance clause and not a functioning internal election. And the cost of elections, which makes parties dependent on those able to supply money.

3. Why is weak internal democracy the most important feature? Because of what it combines with. No Indian law requires a party to hold internal elections or to select candidates by any particular process, so the leadership is typically self-perpetuating. The Tenth Schedule then makes the party's direction binding on its legislators on pain of disqualification. Put together, whoever controls the party controls its votes in the legislature, and that person holds their position without having been elected to it by anybody, which is Michels's iron law of oligarchy operating with the force of constitutional law behind it.

4. How should the growth of caste and community based parties be assessed? On two readings, both of which are accurate. As a sectional appeal, it is what chapter 770 says a party cannot afford, since a body appealing to one community cannot claim to speak for the whole and tends to bargain rather than to govern. As representation, it is the route by which groups excluded from political power for generations obtained it, replacing parties which had claimed to speak for everybody while recruiting from a narrow social base. An answer that gives only one reading has described half the phenomenon.

5. Are these features peculiar to India? Not individually. Personalisation of leadership, weak internal party democracy and dependence on money are found across democracies, and coalitions between parties of divergent declared ideologies are common. What is distinctive is the combination and its legal setting: the scale of diversity, the number of parties, and above all the Tenth Schedule, which gives an Indian party a legal hold over the votes of its legislators that parties in many other democracies do not possess.