लोकसभा में  13 और 14 दिसंबर को संविधान दिवस को लेकर चर्चा होगी. जानकारी के मुताबिक, लोकसभा की कार्यवाही शुक्रवार सुबह 11 बजे से शुरू होगी. 11 बजे से 12 बजे तक प्रश्नकाल होगा. इसके बाद 12 बजे से संविधान दिवस पर चर्चा आरंभ होगी. इस चर्चा की शुरुआत रक्षा मंत्री राजनाथ सिंह करेंगे. सूत्रों के अनुसार, एनडीए के नेता एचडी कुमारस्वामी, श्रीकांत शिंदे, शांभवी चौधरी, राजकुमार सांगवान, जीतन राम मांझी, अनुप्रिया पटेल और राजीव रंजन सिंह इस चर्चा में भाग लेंगे.

वहीं, सबसे खास बात है कि संविधान के 75 वर्षों के सफर पर चर्चा के लिए जो विशेष सत्र आयोजित किया जाएगा, इस ऐतिहासिक बहस में सभी प्रमुख दलों के नेता हिस्सा लेंगे और अपने विचार प्रस्तुत करेंगे. वहीं, कांग्रेस की ओर से प्रियंका गांधी वाड्रा पहली वक्ता होंगी, साथ ही वह लोकसभा में अपना पहला भाषण देंगी. कांग्रेस सूत्रों के अनुसार, प्रियंका गांधी 13 दिसंबर को बहस की शुरुआत कर सकती हैं.

सूत्रों का कहना है कि एनडीए सरकार इस चर्चा के दौरान आपातकाल, विपक्ष द्वारा गढ़े जा रहे फेक नैरेटिव, कई संवैधानिक संशोधनों सहित अन्य मुद्दों को उठाएगी. भाजपा के करीब 12 से 15 नेता इस चर्चा में हिस्सा लेंगे. प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी 14 दिसंबर की शाम को संविधान के 75 वर्षों पर हुई चर्चा का जवाब देंगे. लोकसभा में शुक्रवार, 13 दिसंबर 2024 को संविधान अंगीकरण की 75वीं वर्षगांठ के उपलक्ष्य में विशेष चर्चा सहित कई महत्वपूर्ण विषयों पर चर्चा की जाएगी. लोकसभा सचिवालय ने कार्यसूची जारी कर दी है, जिसमें दिन भर की कार्यवाही का विवरण दिया गया है.

सरकारी कामकाज (सुबह 11:00 बजे से दोपहर 3:30 बजे तक)

प्रश्नकाल:

अलग से जारी प्रश्न सूची में शामिल सवालों के उत्तर दिए जाएंगे.
विशेष चर्चा:

भारतीय संविधान को अंगीकार किए जाने की 75वीं वर्षगांठ पर विशेष चर्चा की जाएगी.

लंबित सरकारी कामकाज:

गुरुवार, 12 दिसंबर 2024 की संशोधित कार्यसूची में शामिल, लेकिन अधूरे रह गए कार्यों पर विचार किया जाएगा.
निजी सदस्यों का कामकाज (दोपहर 3:30 बजे से शाम 6:00 बजे तक)
निजी विधेयकों पर चर्चा:
निजी सदस्यों द्वारा पेश विधेयकों की सूची पर चर्चा होगी. यह सूची पहले ही जारी की जा चुकी है.

कांग्रेस के वक्ता
प्रियंका गांधी: लोकसभा में अपना पहला भाषण देंगी. कांग्रेस सूत्रों के अनुसार, प्रियंका गांधी 13 दिसंबर को बहस की शुरुआत कर सकती हैं.
राहुल गांधी: बहस में शामिल हो सकते हैं.
कांग्रेस ने यह भी सुनिश्चित किया है कि बहस में सभी समुदायों का प्रतिनिधित्व होगा. इसके अलावा शशि थरूर, मनीष तिवारी और गौरव गोगोई भी संबोधित कर सकते हैं.

अन्य पार्टियों के वक्ता
टीएमसी (तृणमूल कांग्रेस): कालयाण बनर्जी और महुआ मोइत्रा पार्टी का प्रतिनिधित्व करेंगे.
एलजेपी (लोक जनशक्ति पार्टी): शंभवी चौधरी बहस में पार्टी की ओर से बोलेंगी.
डीएमके (द्रविड़ मुनेत्र कड़गम): टीआर बालू और ए राजा पार्टी की ओर से हिस्सा लेंगे.

एनडीए के वक्ता और रणनीति
राजनाथ सिंह: रक्षा मंत्री बहस की शुरुआत करेंगे.
अन्य वक्ता: एचडी कुमारस्वामी, श्रीकांत शिंदे, शंभवी चौधरी, राजकुमार सांगवान, जीतन राम मांझी, अनुप्रिया पटेल, और राजीव रंजन सिंह.
भाजपा के 12-15 नेता बहस में भाग लेंगे.

सरकार उठाएगी ये प्रमुख मुद्दे
आपातकाल और उसके प्रभाव.
विपक्ष द्वारा कथित फेक नैरेटिव का मुद्दा.
संवैधानिक संशोधनों की समीक्षा.
प्रधानमंत्री का समापन वक्तव्य
प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी इस बहस पर चर्चा का समापन 14 दिसंबर की शाम को करेंगे. यह बहस भारतीय संविधान की 75 साल की यात्रा पर केंद्रित होगी, जिसमें इसकी मजबूती, विकास और समकालीन चुनौतियों पर विचार किया जाएगा. लोकसभा में इस बहस के दौरान हर पार्टी के नेताओं से रचनात्मक और गहन चर्चा की उम्मीद की जा रही है.

National Conference leader and Lok Sabha MP from Srinagar, Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi has said that he would submit a notice seeking an impeachment motion against Allahabad High Court judge Shekhar Kumar Yadav over the latter’s recent remarks against Muslims at a VHP event.

Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court sparked a row when he said the country would function according to the wishes of the majority in India. 

Mehdi said on December 10 that he has support from the Congress, Samajwadi Party, DMK, and Trinamool Congress members in the opposition camp for the impeachment motion.

National Conference leader and Lok Sabha MP from Srinagar, Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi has said that he would submit a notice seeking an impeachment motion against Allahabad High Court judge Shekhar Kumar Yadav over the latter’s recent remarks against Muslims at a VHP event.

Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court sparked a row when he said last week the country would function according to the wishes of the majority in India.

Mehdi said on December 10 that he has support from the Congress, the Samajwadi Party, the DMK, and the Trinamool Congress members in the opposition camp for the impeachment motion.

“I am moving impeachment motion in the Parliament in accordance with Art 124(4) of the constitution for the removal of this Justice namely Shekhar K Yadav, a sitting Judge in Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, on the charges mentioned in the notice,” Mehdi said in a post on X.

Justice Yadav delivered a lecture on the Constitutional Necessity of Uniform Civil CodeVishva Hindu ParishadAsaduddin Owaisi sahab, Shri Rajkumar Roat Hon’ble MP from Rajasthan, Shri Sudhama Prasad ji Hon’ble MP from Bihar, Jinab Mohibbullah Sahab Hon’ble MP from U.P and Jinab Ziau Rahman sahab, Hon’ble MP from U.P signed it and I thank them for their support and signatures,” Ruhullah Mehdi added.

Owaisi had called out the HC judge’s remarks saying that the Constitution of India is not a majoritarian but a democratic one. “In a democracy, the minority’s rights are protected. As Ambedkar put it ‘…as a King has no Divine Right to rule, so also a majority has no Divine Right to rule’,” the Hyderabad MP said.

When Tamil filmstar “Thalapathy” Vijay, or General Vijay as his fans fondly call him, stepped on to the podium on October 27 to deliver a 45-minute speech, he was greeted by roars and applause in a charged and theatrical event that opened yet another exciting chapter in a State where politics and cinema have been conjoined twins since the 1950s.

The occasion was the maiden political conference of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), the political party launched in February this year by the 50-year-old megastar. The venue was Vikravandi, a small town some 150 km south of Chennai, in Villupuram district.

The event had all the trappings of the star’s multi-crore blockbuster films, including a thundering monologue in which he promised to write an epitaph to the nearly six-decade-long rule of the two Dravidian parties as well as eliminate any pretenders to the throne.

Ideological contradictions

While the cannily choreographed event held his fans in thrall, the script was a bit confused, as some analysts pointed out. In his ambitious pursuit to appropriate two phrases/concepts currently in political circulation—“Dravidam” or Dravidian ideology and “Tamil nationalism”—Vijay seemed to have fallen into a web of ideological contradictions. Given his popularity, he definitely has one foot in the door of Tamil Nadu politics, but gaining a firm footing in the State’s complex landscape will take some doing.

Also Read | How Dravidian politics offers a bulwark against the exclusionary politics of Hindutva

Vijay’s speech invoked “Periyar” E.V. Ramasamy, Dr B.R. Ambedkar, Congress leader and former Chief Minister Kamaraj, and freedom fighters Velu Nachiyar and Anjalai Ammal, as ideological mentors, leaving his fans convinced that the star’s performance in politics would make as much impact with the masses as his superhit films. But hardnosed pundits were less easily swayed. The truth lies somewhere in between. While it is undeniable that Vijay has created a mass political impact, his venture’s ideological underpinnings seem to be riddled with severe contradictions.

For instance, Vijay claimed that “Dravidam” and “Tamil nationalism” were the two eyes of his party, but this betrays a lack of understanding of the oxymoronic nature of such a combination. Dravidam, unlike Tamil nationalism, is an inclusive ideology that does not discriminate on the basis of language. In fact, the film director-turned-politician S. Seeman pitches Tamil nationalism against Dravidam as the credo of Naam Tamilar Katchi (NTK), the party he launched in 2010, which has found resonance among a section of youngsters in the State.

Vijay also made a statement on rationalism and atheism, which brought back memories of “Annaism”, a term that matinee idol M.G. Ramachandran (MGR) coined after he launched the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) in 1972. (It was in reference to his mentor and former Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai’s political philosophy.) Vijay said that while he accepted Periyar as his ideological mentor, he disowned Periyar’s atheism. He then went on to state: “We will follow Anna’s principle of ‘Onre kulam, oruvane devan’ (‘One community, one god’).”

He said that for him, both Periyar and Ambedkar were on the same page. Yet, both Periyar and Ambedkar spoke strongly against any form of religion that sanctifies caste. Vijay denounced birth-based hierarchies, which is the basis of “varnashrama dharma”. He quoted Tamil poet Thiruvalluvar’s words, “Pirapokkum ella uyirkkum” (all are equal by birth), but accepted on that very stage a copy of the Bhagavad Gita, which upholds the principles of “varnashrama dharma”.

Targeting DMK

In his speech, the star-turned-politician declared that that the right-wing with its divisive agenda was his ideological enemy, and corrupt forces his political enemy. Although he consciously avoided naming any political party, he indirectly targeted the “corrupt Dravidian model of governance” of one family and took a strong stand against the ruling party by claiming that he would bring “genuine” social justice to the State.

Vijay’s attempt to expose the alleged duplicity of certain political parties who brand their opponents as being “fascist” when they themselves are guilty of displaying fascist tendencies also drew flak, as some wondered whether his mocking tone betrayed his lack of understanding of what the term actually means.

While he targeted right-wing majoritarianism, he made only mild references to contentious issues such as the Governor’s chair, NEET, and the caste census. The strong critical reaction to what was widely perceived as Vijay’s “soft” censure of the BJP government at the Centre soon forced the TVK to resort to some damage control. Within days of the Vikravandi speech, an executive committee meeting was convened in which the party passed a few more resolutions against the Central government, including those against the “One nation, one election” plank and the three-language formula.

VCK leader Thol. Thirumavalavan speaking to the media in Chennai on March 23.
| Photo Credit:
S.R. RAGHUNATHAN

On the day of the event, the biggest surprise came at the very end of Vijay’s speech when he announced, almost as an afterthought, that all political outfits were welcome to join him in his fight against the “corrupt Dravidian family politics” and that, if elected, he would offer them a “share in power”.

The State’s political parties, especially the DMK’s allies, to whom the “offer” was ostensibly made, reacted cautiously. Except for two Dalit outfits—Puthiya Thamizhagam and Puratchi Bharatham, which are not in the DMK alliance—no other party has shown interest in the offer so far, although it has created a buzz in the State.

Two-fold agenda

Vijay’s agenda is twofold: break the DMK alliance and prevent the AIADMK from forming one. Political watchers believe that the offer of a share in power is an attempt to weaken the DMK’s alliance, which has remained intact since the 2019 Assembly election, largely to the DMK’s benefit. Vijay clearly sees Thol. Thirumavalavan’s Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) as the weakest link in the alliance, for which he cannot be faulted.

Of late, there have been differences of opinion within the VCK, with second-rung leaders openly discussing power sharing, Ministerial berths, and even the Deputy Chief Minister post. But these demands are not new; Thirumavalavan has often said that the party would stake its claim at the opportune time.

After Vijay’s speech, one of VCK’s deputy general secretaries, Aadhav Arjuna, posted his views on the social media platform X, which created embarrassment for both the DMK and the VCK.

Arjuna, a former DMK sympathiser, tweeted that Vijay had scripted a new chapter in State politics by offering to share power. What Vijay and Arjuna fail to understand, say experts, is that in the first-past-the-post electoral system, power sharing is generally a post-election exercise.

VCK dilemma

For some time now, the VCK leadership has been under enormous pressure from a few small but persistent Dalit groups to exit the DMK alliance. These groups, active in social media, are averse to what they call the “patronage politics” and “big brother” attitude of the Dravidian majors, especially the DMK.

But VCK general secretary D. Ravikumar told Frontline that Thirumavalavan had repeatedly clarified the party’s stand on power sharing. He said: “These rumours are constantly peddled by those trying to break the alliance. The actor is hesitant to even name the BJP, which he declares as his ideological enemy, but attacks the DMK and its allies who fight fascist forces. What sort of politics is he taking up?”

While the confusing signals emanating from the VCK might be the reason for Vijay’s overture, it is no exaggeration to say that his offer has slightly dented the armour of the alliance. The uneasiness is palpable; both the DMK and the AIADMK have to tread cautiously, since both suffered some erosion in their vote share in the recent Lok Sabha election.

The other DMK allies face no such predicament. Durai Vaiko, principal secretary of the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK), an ally in the DMK alliance, dismissed Vijay’s accusations against the DMK as “unnecessary”. The Congress said that it would “wait and watch”. The Left and other allies refused to be drawn into any controversy that might upset the alliance. Interestingly, the AIADMK has also remained non-committal after Vijay’s arrival.

VCK general secretary D. Ravikumar.
| Photo Credit:
T. Singaravelou

A senior DMK spokesperson said that the party’s allies had decided to revisit confidence-building strategies. Their leaders met DMK president and Chief Minister M.K. Stalin to reassure and reiterate their commitment. A party source said that Stalin asked his party leaders and cadres to not “react impulsively”.

Excitement in electorate

While actors such as Kamal Haasan engage in part-time politics, Vijay’s full-time plunge into an arena where the DMK and AIADMK are entrenched, enjoying a combined 60-65 per cent of the vote share, has whipped up excitement among the electorate and raised curiosity.

During the conference, Vijay said: “At the peak of my career, I am forsaking it for the welfare of my people. A few questions have been nagging me for some time now. What have I done to those people who have made me what I am today? How can I pay them back? And this is it.” He also promised “a corruption-free, secular, and social justice government”.

Any attempt to create a third front as an alternative to the two Dravidian majors does not hold promise, going by past experience. In 2016, the Makkal Nala Kootani was a flop. But Vijay’s confidence might stem from the fact that he presumes that a space has opened up for a third party after the demise of two tall leaders on both sides of the Dravidian flank, M. Karunanidhi and Jayalalithaa.

“It is premature to discuss a political strategy as the next election is more than a year away,” said Prof. G. Palanithurai, former Professor of the Rajiv Gandhi Chair for Panchayati Raj Studies at the Gandhigram Rural Institute.

Possible impact

Speaking to Frontline, he said that Vijay could mainly play spoilsport for now. “Although there is a general disenchantment among certain sections against the parties that had ruled and are ruling, how he is going to perform remains to be seen. Vijay’s entry will escalate the value of votes in today’s market-driven politics,” he said.

Also Read | Political power is essential for a subaltern party: Thol. Thirumavalavan

Dravidian politics and Tamil cinema have always had a symbiotic relationship. From the DMK’s founders Annadurai and Karunanidhi to the actors MGR and Jayalalithaa, and later Vijaykanth and Kamal Haasan, not to mention Rajnikanth’s occasional cryptic signals, there is very little politics without cinema in Tamil Nadu. Vijay’s entry ensures that continuity.

At this time, Vijay’s major catchment areas are clearly marked: first-time voters, Dalit and Vanniyar youth, and his fan clubs, which his father and director S.A. Chandrasekhar studiously cultivated since 2009 and which are a dedicated source of supply of cadres. The fact that Dalit and Vanniyar youths are among his ardent fans will cause major worries to the VCK, the Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam (DMDK), and the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK). Vijay is also likely to trigger a major erosion in the NTK.

The major takeaway from Vijay’s maiden speech is that his ambition is possibly to reconstruct the Dravidian political fortress from within its precincts. It is a challenging feat that will require staying power and a more sharply delineated ideological stance.

Samsung workers’ strike entered its 25th day on October 3, in Kancheepuram.
| Photo Credit: B. VELANKANNI RAJ

The principal demand of the striking workers of Samsung Electronics India Pvt. Ltd in Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu, was that their newly formed Samsung India Workers Union (SIWU) should be registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The protest, which lasted more than 30 days, was an epic struggle in more than one way. All leading trade unions in Tamil Nadu extended their support to the workers’ demand, as did unions in other companies.

For the past 17 years, Samsung India has resisted the formation of a trade union. In June 2024, the workers formed the SIWU. They affiliated it to the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU) and applied for the union’s registration under Section 8 of the 1926 Act. Under the Act, the Registrar of Trade Unions, on being satisfied that the application is in order, has no option but to register the union.

Trade Unions Act

The Trade Unions Act is an important piece of legislation. In the early 1920s, workers of Binny Mills in Chennai (then known as Madras) went on strike. The management filed a civil suit claiming huge damages, which the union leaders could ill afford to pay. After the Act came into force, Sections 17 and 18 gave members of a registered trade union immunity from criminal and civil consequences. But for this, workmen would not be able to engage in collective action.

Also Read | Samsung strike: Workers arrested as battle for union recognition continues

The Act enables outsiders and political leaders to be office-bearers of a union. The union can collect funds for the political interests of its members. Many trade unions have been registered in the nearly 100 years since. But Samsung’s objections were mainly two: the use of the name Samsung by the union, and outsiders being a part of the union.

Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution guarantees the right to form a trade union. The enforcement of this right is also a fundamental right under Article 32 of the Constitution. Despite the statutory provision and the fundamental right under the Constitution, the Samsung management has opposed the formation of a trade union. When, strangely, the Registrar of Trade Unions did not act on SIWU’s application, the union had no other option but to move the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the Registrar to issue a certificate of registration.

Royal Enfield employees on a strike in Kancheepuram in October 2018 that lasted for 50 days.
| Photo Credit:
B. VELANKANNI RAJ

The Act is clear, and the prayer before the High Court is also simple. The trade union is the only party that can appear before the Registrar of Trade Unions. The company, however, filed a petition before the Registrar objecting to the use of the name Samsung.

The objection is not only not maintainable but also totally untenable as the union is only asking for the name Samsung India Workers Union to be registered under the Trade Unions Act. It is not a registration under the Trademarks Act, which bars competing businesses from using the name of another company. The registration of the union is a non-monetary demand.

Onus on Samsung

A similar objection was negated by the Karnataka High Court when State Bank of India objected to the use of its name by the employees’ union. Ironically, in South Korea, the Samsung workers’ union is called National Samsung Electronics Union.

The company must reckon with the existence of a trade union and follow the laws of this country, which allow the formation of a trade union and give immunity to union members when they opt for collective action. Had the Registrar registered the trade union, there would have been no need for the workers to go on strike, much less move the court.

The leaders of various trade unions have criticised the company and the State government. Su. Venkatesan, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) MP from Madurai, said that the workers were only protesting for their rights in a democratic way. Pattali Makkal Katchi leader Anbumani Ramadoss condemned the Tamil Nadu government for using oppressive measures against the workers.

The rights of the working class are protected under the law of the land, and in this matter, the State government did not act properly. The Labour Progressive Front (LPF), the trade union wing of the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), made it appear as though the SIWU was demanding recognition of the trade union, little understanding the fundamental difference between registration and recognition. As far as registration is concerned, the law is very clear, and the company has hardly any say in the matter. Be it a local industrialist or a multinational company, the law is the same. The DMK union, for reasons best known to it, appears to have been attempting to mislead the working class.

Government’s stand

The question being asked now is regarding the policy of the State government towards workers wanting to form a trade union in a multinational company. The government’s initial stand was that it was principally a matter between the company and the workers. As days passed, the State government did not ascertain whether the company had acted as per the law and unleashed the police on the protesting workers to break the strike. The police tore down the pandals put up for the agitation and also arrested the protesting workers. The government told CITU leaders not to magnify the strike. But the struggle was only for the basic right to form a trade union. The government did little to resolve the issue but issued a unilateral statement that the union had withdrawn the strike with no mention of the government’s stand on the union’s registration. The signs were unmistakable that the government had chosen to back the multinational company.

Also Read | No difference between what is said by Samsung and Tamil Nadu government: E. Muthukumar

To resolve the struggle once and for all, the Tamil Nadu government must ensure that the union is registered.

The governments at the Centre and in the State are not concerned about the constitutional goal to better the living standards of workers, who have been betrayed time and again. Capital and profits are the strong arm of the owning classes. The protection given by the Trade Unions Act for collective struggle helps the working class gain some strength in an unequal relationship. It is here that the State’s role in the Samsung struggle assumes importance.

N.G.R. Prasad and K.K. Ram Siddhartha are advocates in Madras High Court. The former appeared for the petitioner.

Catch all the Business News, Politics news,Breaking NewsEvents andLatest News Updates on Live Mint. Download TheMint News App to get Daily Market Updates.

MoreLess

Catch all the Business News, Politics news,Breaking NewsEvents andLatest News Updates on Live Mint. Download TheMint News App to get Daily Market Updates.

MoreLess

“The [DMK] party is not Sankara Mutt,” former Chief Minister and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam president M. Karunanidhi had famously responded, on multiple occasions, to questions if his son M.K. Stalin would succeed him as party chief. He went on to explain that the party would decide on his successor and not a pontiff (or the elder in the house). (In the Sankara Mutt in Kancheepuram, succession is decided by the pontiff and not by popular vote.) Every time the argument of dynastic succession was brought up at press interactions or in private conversations, Karunanidhi would point out that the DMK was structured as a democratic political party that valued the opinion of the majority of its members.

Stalin had to climb the hierarchy the hard way. He became a member of the party general council in 1973 and won his first Assembly election in 1989, after losing an earlier one. Although he became the elected Mayor of Chennai in 1996, Stalin had to wait until 2006, his fourth term as an MLA, to be inducted into the Cabinet.

By then it was clear that Stalin would succeed Karunanidhi as the DMK president. This was, however, not formally stated until the DMK’s party constitution was amended in 2017 to elevate Stalin as “working president”. The next year, after Karunanidhi’s death, the DMK general council named him party president.

On Stalin’s elevation, R. Mani, an independent journalist and popular talking head on Tamil news television, said: “It was family politics or dynastic politics no doubt, but it was done gradually, over a period of more than 40 years. Stalin was jailed during the Emergency and brutally beaten up. I know this because my father’s close friend, who is now a neurosurgeon in the US, treated him. Over the years, Karunanidhi groomed him, and making him Mayor was part of the process.”

Also Read | DMK at 75: How Karunanidhi’s vision collides with caste realities in modern Dravidian politics

He added: “Stalin was also an instinctively political person. So, in 2009, when Stalin was made Deputy Chief Minister, seniors like Anbazhagan did not protest. There was method in the elevation.” (K. Anbazhagan was former Finance Minister and former DMK general secretary.)

The new heir

In contrast, Udhayanidhi Stalin’s elevation as Deputy Chief Minister in September 2024 was quick, even by the standards of dynastic politics. He made his first political on-stage appearance in 2018. In just about six years, he has gone from the DMK president’s son to No.3 in the State protocol among Ministers. Actually, he is de facto No.2 in both party and government. The elevation is all the more surprising because in 2017 Stalin had stated that no one from his family would join politics. He repeated this on a Tamil television channel in 2018. Udhayanidhi, too, in a response tweet to this correspondent in May 2011 had claimed: “I don’t hav any intention of gettin into politics” [sic]. In June that year, he reiterated: “Kandippa politics vara maataen” (I certainly won’t enter politics). He repeated it a few interviews later. (Both tweets have since been deleted.)

In 2019, Udhayanidhi was suddenly named the party’s star campaigner for the Lok Sabha election. On July 4 that year, he was made secretary of the party’s youth wing. He immersed himself in party work, dividing the youth wing into seven zones and conducting meetings and classes. It helped that he had the blessings of his father and party president, and it was also made clear to the party’s district bosses that they had to support the youth wing’s efforts.

Ahead of the 2021 Assembly election, media reports speculated that he would contest a seat. A report in The Hindu in March 2021 said that when Udhayanidhi appeared before a DMK Assembly seat selection panel, his father appeared surprised. “‘Mr. Stalin, who was present there, wondered why he had come for the interview since he had already been advised not to contest in the election,’ a senior DMK source said…. Mr. Stalin put his foot down saying that he could not be given the ticket. Party leaders said Mr. Stalin was not ready to play into the hands of his critics, who have been accusing him of promoting his son in the party.”

A few days later, however, it was announced that Udhayanidhi would contest the Triplicane-Chepauk seat, one of the safest DMK seats. His opponent was a lightweight from the Pattali Makkal Katchi, and Udhayanidhi had a cakewalk into the Assembly. He campaigned extensively and did well to capture the imagination of the voters by holding up a brick and proclaiming that he had “stolen” it from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) site in Madurai. The “otha sengal” (single brick) back story is that the Centre announced an AIIMS in Madurai, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid the foundation stone ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha election. But there was zero progress even in 2021.

Electoral campaigns and victory

This provided great campaign material for Udhayanidhi and the DMK, with the former proclaiming he had “stolen” the only brick he found at the AIIMS site. While his speech did not have much variation (and hence did not make for good television), it resonated among the cadre, who cheered when he displayed the brick with “AIIMS” written on it.

When the DMK won the 2021 election, it was speculated that Udhayanidhi would be made a Minister. When his name did not make it to the list, senior party members and Ministers kept periodically claiming that he had “all the qualities for a Minister”. And just 18 months after becoming an MLA, he was appointed Minister.

Udhayanidhi was given charge of the Sports (and Youth Welfare) Ministry, in line with the image sought for him, that of a young leader wanting to reach out to the youth. He was given additional charge of Special Programme Implementation (SPI), poverty alleviation, rural indebtedness, and, later, planning and development.

SPI cuts across departments and Ministries and encompasses all welfare programmes implemented in the State. It works directly with the Tamil Nadu Skill Development Corporation, Skill Acquisition and Knowledge Awareness for Livelihood Promotion, Tamil Nadu Apex Skill Development Centre, and the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister’s Fellowship Programme.

At this time, Dr Darez Ahamed, a civil servant known for his efficiency and ability to work with politicians, who had made a significant contribution to the National Health Mission in the State, was put in charge of SPI. He was also put in charge of the Chess Olympiad, the first major programme Udhayanidhi undertook, and it was a spectacular success.

Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin gets a warm welcome by supporters upon his arrival in Virudhunagar district to attend various functions, on October 1.
| Photo Credit:
PTI

Similarly, when Udhayanidhi was elevated as Deputy Chief Minister, cementing his position in both party and government, Pradeep Yadav, another civil servant known for his efficiency, connections in New Delhi, and ability to work seamlessly with the political leadership, was made secretary to the Deputy Chief Minister. This was a new phenomenon. In the two earlier occasions when the State has had Deputy Chief Ministers—in the form of Stalin and O. Panneerselvam—neither had civil servants as personal secretaries.

Strong officers

These moves make it clear that Stalin is aware of the flaws of such a rapid promotion to Udhayanidhi and is trying to mitigate some of the damage by appointing strong officers to handle critical issues.

At the same time, the elevation of his son has increased murmurs about Stalin’s health. Sources said that Stalin told a DMK senior:“I won’t make him [my son] wait too long.” A reference perhaps to the four decades that Stalin had to wait before he could make it to the top chair.

Within the party, there is no publicly expressed dissent. For one, the seniors are too old and their children have skin in the game, a few of them already elected representatives at various levels. A party functionary said: “I look at it this way. The leader has endorsed X or Y. We accept the decision because he understands the party and the State better than us.”

Competition within DMK

There is just one competitor to Udhayanidhi in the DMK, his aunt and Stalin’s half-sister, Kanimozhi, once a challenger to Stalin’s position itself. Kanimozhi, a published poet and an economics student who worked as a journalist in India and Singapore, resisted popular demands to join the party until late 2006. In 2007, she was nominated to the Rajya Sabha.

Initially brought in to counter AIADMK supremo Jayalalithaa, she won the Thoothukudi seat in 2019 and 2024 and went on to become the DMK’s deputy leader in the Lok Sabha and a valuable English-speaking party representative in New Delhi. In 2022, Stalin made her the DMK’s deputy general secretary.

The dearth of leadership material in the DMK after the mid-1990s has three reasons. It was partly by design because Karunanidhi did not want another challenger like Vaiko (who went on to launch the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam); it was partly because regional leaders were content nurturing their own pocket boroughs; and lastly, after Stalin took over, he almost doubled the number of district secretaries to 65, thereby reducing the power of this feared and respected party pillar.

Reaction to elevation

While the DMK’s allies have welcomed Udhayanidhi’s elevation, the BJP has questioned it. BJP State president K. Annamalai, now on study leave in the UK, tweeted on September 29: “The sun shines for the privileged few….”

Mani, the independent journalist, said the move was brazen and undignified. “This is throwing all political decency to the winds. This is a party which, since 2021, has been talking about social justice. The very concept of social justice is a contradiction to dynasty politics.”

Also Read | Son joins father’s Cabinet in Tamil Nadu: Udhayanidhi Stalin sworn in as Minister for Sports

Mani argues that the post of Deputy Chief Minister or Deputy Prime Minister is created for a reason and there was no compelling reason in Tamil Nadu to do so. “In Stalin’s case, Kalaignar [Karunanidhi] was not well. In Panneerselvam’s case, it was a political consideration,” he said, adding that when inner party power structures get problematic, as in Karnataka, it too could warrant a Deputy Chief Minister. “In this case, the only reason is to keep power in the family.”

Today, the opposition is at its weakest in Tamil Nadu. If the AIADMK and the BJP lead separate coalitions in the 2026 election, it will be easy for the DMK to win a three-cornered election. The Tamil superstar Vijay has just entered politics, but his stand on most issues is not yet clear. There seems to be a marked reluctance in the way he is taking each step forward. As of now, he does not seem to be a major challenger.

With the party’s rank and file accepting Udhayanidhi’s elevation, it is now up to the people of Tamil Nadu to decide if this was the right time and if he was the right choice to succeed Stalin. They will get their chance to speak in 2026.