The sudden demise of Congress leader lalatendu (lulu) Bidyadhar Mohapatra has saddened many political leaders across party lines in Odisha. Starting his career from student politics in Congress, he won from his home Assembly constituency, Brahmagiri, thrice consecutively since 1995.
Though he was in Congress, he was not a narrow partisan leader. last August, Union Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Dharmendra Pradhan visited his native village Gadarodanga, to pay tribute to his grandfather , the legendary freedom fighter Buxi Jagabandhu Bidyadhar Mohapatra as part of the BJP’s Triranga Yatra under the “70 Saal Azadi - Zara Yaad Karo Kurbani” programme. He did not make his grandfather his political capital, but built his political career on his own organizational skills.
lalatendu’s death has raised the question of youth leadership development in political parties in the State. Why politicians feel the vacuum after MohapatraIJ How political leaders used to be groomed in the State in the pastIJ The first generation political leaders of Odisha were developed from freedom movement like any other States of India. They imbibed the values of secularism, socialism and honesty from the freedom struggle. Thus the Chief Ministers and Ministers of first two decades after Independence showed greater value- commitment than development appetite. In comparison to other States, caste and class oppression were reportedly less in Odisha at that time due to such value loaded political class. But critics say that too much value orientation led to slow development of the State in national scene during 60s and 70s.
Besides, there was growth of State level political parties like Ganatra Parishad , Odisha Jana Congress and Utkal Congress etc. There was presence of left parties in 6/7 Assembly constituencies too. Thus large numbers of youth leaders were promoted due to multiplicity of parties in Odisha.
Post- emergency, JP movement produced more youth leaders in the State and reinforced the socialist values in old leaders. Janata Dal formation polarized the State into bi-polar Congress and non-Congress camps, marginalizing left force and germinating BJP since 1980. JB Patnaik and Biju Patnaik emerged as two leaders. The two leaders started grooming youth leaders, picking them from colleges and universities; be it Srikanta Jena or Panchanan Kanungo or lulu Mohapatra or Uma Ballab Rath. On the otherhand , BJP and left youth leaders were nourished in colleges and universities through student wings of their respective parties .Union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan developed from ABVP organization. OBC or Dalit movements did not have much impact on leadership creation in the State unlike UP and Bihar.
The BJD, which came to power in the State in 2000, brought back almost all leaders from the parent Janata Dal. As BJD had alliance with BJP and was contesting from 84 Assembly seats only out of 147, there was no requirement for new leaders. BJD did not build youth leaders through proper system. Naveen Patnaik did not build leaders like the way JB and Biju did. Pyarimohan Mohapatra , who was the then strategist of BJD, talked about building a cader system in the party, but did not pursue. Thus when BJD broke alliance with BJP and contested in 2009 and 2014 from all 147 seats, it did not have its own cadres. Therefore, the party took MlA and MP candidates from various walks of life starting from business, film industry, and journalism and so on. It also imported candidates from other parties. As winnabilty becomes the criteria of candidate at election time, only those caders will come to party who can win elections. BJD also took few political leaders with student politics background. But systematic youth cader building system is still missing in BJD and its college wings are less oganised in comparison to that of national parties like ABVP, AISF or NSUI. As BJD is in power, it has no scope of picking up leaders from protest movements BJP was in power in the State from 2000 to 2009. BJP, in alliance format, contested from 63 Assembly seats in 2000, but won only in 38 seats. Though it was quick gain from its 1995 Assembly performance of nine seats, the result indicated tough opposition from Congress in the failed 25 constituencies. But BJP perhaps did not undertake strategic leadership development programme after 2000 election to bridge the weakness in leadership in the failed constituencies due to which it lost again in 31 Assembly constituencies out of 63. However, both 2000 and 2004 elections witnessed people liking BJP leaders for its ideological leanings. There was a need for youth leadership development programme with long term vision. As that did not happen, BJP performance diminished to 1995 Assembly performance level in 2009 and 2014 polls when BJD dropped the alliance. After 2014, BJP is gearing up its leadership development programmes in colleges and outside which will give it benefit in the long run.
What has happened to Congress during post 2000 periodIJ JB’s eclipse from the State began after 2000 Assembly election and he was marginally powerful till he left for Assam Governor’s role. 2009 and 2014 Assembly polls saw disturbance in Congress leading to heavy setbacks. After JB, there was no leadership development effort. There was scope for picking up leaders from protest movements but Congress did not follow that approach. After lalatendu, there was no emergence of strong youth or student leader. Now Congress is developing its youth and student wings but there are no systematic training programmes.
Apart from the mainstream parties, other parties like JMM, CPI, CPM and newly formed Odisha parties did not give importance on cader building training for youth. Therefore rural and tribal areas of Odisha continue to remain ideological cader less. BJD won PRIs and UlBs in massive numbers in the State but it has very less party ideology based caders. The absence of youth leaders in the State could be a reason for the major power political leaders missing lalatendu.
But does Odisha need any serious political leadership development processIJ A State can opt for the bureaucracy -led model of governance or political leadership based model. Bureaucracy led models are best suited when a State needs major focus on programme implementation. But bureaucracy is status- quoist. On the other hand, if a State needs reforms, the Government has to be political leadership based. The reform like abolition of triple talaq or entry of women to temples or abolition of casteism or land reform cannot be achieved in a bureaucratic model of administration. You cannot put police to bring reform. Here you need political leadership based administration. Political leadership is also needed in building a business climate like solving land-acquisition related conflict. Emergency situation also needs political leadership.
There was mismanagement of rescue and relief work during 1999 Super Cyclone due to lack of political leadership in the State. Similarly, the recent mismanagement of JE epidemic in Malkanagiri also exhibited lack of political leadership. It is true that the JE virus cannot be treated and immunization cannot be done suddenly but preventive steps could have been taken which need motivation of community by local MlA, MP and PRI leaders. In absence of such leadership, one district Collector intervened to save a child’s life by forcibly taking her to hospital from unwilling parents.
A Chief Minister might be enough to run the State Government but to effect social welfare, there has to be growth of political leadership at Block, District and State levels among ruling and political parties in Odisha. Odisha needs both implementation and social reforms.
All political parties must groom youth leaders at various tiers so that democracy is activated and no political party needs to import candidates from another party. What is needed for political parties is to clearly State their vision for Odisha and their ideology for 2019 Assembly election.
(Cellphone-9439178588)