The DMK’s Delimitation Drama: Hypocrisy and Political Opportunism on Display 

The Joint Action Committee meeting exposes the Congress’s duplicity and the DMK’s divisive tactics. Is this cooperative federalism or political brinkmanship?

The upcoming Joint Action Committee (JAC) meeting, organized by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) on 22 March, has sparked a heated debate on the issue of the delimitation of Lok Sabha and state assembly seats. While the meeting aims to unite political parties against population-based delimitation, it has instead exposed a glaring hypocrisy within the DMK and its allies, particularly the Congress party.

The timing of the meeting, the contradictory stands of key stakeholders, and the divisive rhetoric employed by DMK leaders raise serious questions about the true motives behind this exercise. Far from being a genuine effort to protect the rights of Southern states, the JAC meeting appears to be a politically motivated spectacle designed to stoke regional tensions and consolidate vote banks ahead of the 2024 elections.

At the heart of the controversy is the Congress party’s baffling duplicity on the issue of delimitation. Rahul Gandhi, the face of the Congress, has been a vocal advocate of the principle of Jitni Abadi, Utna Haq rights proportional to population. This slogan, often used by Gandhi to champion the cause of marginalized communities, directly contradicts the stance taken by the Congress and its allies in the JAC. The core agenda of the JAC is to oppose population-based delimitation, arguing that it would penalize Southern states for their success in controlling population growth and deny them their rightful share of parliamentary representation. This glaring inconsistency has not gone unnoticed. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in October 2023, had already warned that the Congress was misleading the Southern states by advocating for population-based rights while simultaneously opposing delimitation based on the same principle.

Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge’s recent statement that population-based delimitation amounts to social injustice for the people of the South only adds to the confusion. How can the same party that champions proportional representation based on population in one context vehemently oppose it in another? This blatant contradiction exposes the Congress’s politics of opportunism, where principles are sacrificed at the altar of electoral gains. The DMK, as a key ally of Congress, has a moral obligation to question this duplicity during the JAC meeting. Will the DMK have the courage to ask Rahul Gandhi to clarify his stance on Jitni Abadi, and Utna Haq in the context of delimitation? Or will it choose to turn a blind eye to this hypocrisy for the sake of political convenience?

The DMK’s sudden focus on delimitation also raises questions about its timing and intent. The issue of delimitation has been frozen since 1976, when the Congress government, during the Emergency, passed the 42nd Constitutional Amendment, deferring the process until the 2001 Census. This decision was ostensibly taken to encourage population control measures.

In 2002, the Vajpayee-led NDA government, of which the DMK was a part, further extended the freeze on delimitation until the first Census after 2026 through the 84th Constitutional Amendment. Given that the next delimitation exercise is still several years away, the DMK’s decision to raise the issue now seems politically motivated, especially with Tamil Nadu elections looming on the horizon.

The DMK’s rhetoric on delimitation has been laced with divisive undertones, further undermining the spirit of cooperative federalism. Senior DMK minister Duraimurugan’s derogatory remark about North Indians “Those people give birth to 10 children like pigs do” is a case in point. Such statements not only perpetuate harmful stereotypes but also deepen the North-South divide for narrow political gains. By framing the delimitation issue as a battle between the progressive South and the backward North, the DMK is playing a dangerous game that could have long-term repercussions for national unity.

In contrast to the DMK’s fear-mongering, the Central government has taken a more constructive approach to address the concerns of Southern states. Home Minister Amit Shah, in a statement in the Lok Sabha, unequivocally assured that no Southern state would lose a single seat after delimitation on a pro-rata basis. He reaffirmed Prime Minister Modi’s commitment to safeguarding the interests of the Southern states, ensuring that they benefit from an increase in seats in line with their population growth. This assurance should have put the issue to rest, but the DMK and its allies continue to fan the flames of discontent, suggesting that their real agenda is not cooperative federalism but divisive politics.

The JAC meeting, with its lofty agenda of protecting the rights of Southern states, risks becoming a platform for political posturing rather than meaningful dialogue. By inviting seven Chief Ministers and 29 political parties, the DMK has positioned itself as the champion of Southern interests. However, its selective outrage and divisive rhetoric undermine the credibility of this initiative. True cooperative federalism requires constructive engagement and a commitment to national unity, not the creation of artificial fault lines for electoral gains.

The delimitation debate is a complex issue that requires careful consideration of multiple factors, including population growth, demographic changes, and the principles of federalism. While it is important to address the legitimate concerns of states, it is equally important to ensure that the process is not hijacked by political opportunists seeking to exploit regional sentiments. The DMK and its allies must rise above petty politics and engage in a constructive dialogue with the Central government to find a solution that balances the interests of all states.

In conclusion, the JAC meeting organized by the DMK is a classic case of political hypocrisy and opportunism. The Congress party’s contradictory stance on delimitation, the DMK’s divisive rhetoric, and the timing of the meeting all point to a carefully orchestrated political drama aimed at consolidating vote banks rather than addressing genuine concerns.

If the DMK is serious about protecting the rights of Southern states, it must first confront the contradictions within its alliance and engage in a constructive dialogue with the Central government. Otherwise, the JAC meeting will be remembered not as a milestone in cooperative federalism but as a missed opportunity to rise above divisive politics.