POLITICAL SCIENCE-II-INDIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM

MODULE-II
(Indian Party System: Nature and Trends, National and Regional Parties, Coalition Politics. Interest Groups
and Pressure Groups. The role of Media in Political Process.)

POLITICAL PARTIES:-MEANING AND TYPES

In the present day democratic countries, political parties are considered as essential components
for the formation and working of the government. Of course, in some countries like Libya, Oman, Qatar and the
United Arab Emirates, there are governments without parties. These countries are not democratic and political
parties are banned there. We can therefore infer that democracies function successfully in countries which have
competitive party systems. Political parties actually help the institutions and processes of a government
democratic. They enable people to participate in elections and other processes of governance, educate them and
facilitate them to make policy choices.
A political party is generally described as an organized body of people who share common
principles and cherish certain common goals regarding the political system. A political party operates and seeks
political power through constitutional means to translate its policies into practice. It is a body of like-minded
people having similar views on matters of public concern.
Gilchrist defines a political party as ―an organized group of citizens who profess or share the same
political views and who by acting as a political unit, try to control the government‖.
Another definition given by Gettell is: ―a political party consists of a group of citizens, more or less
organized, who act as a political unit and who, by the use of their voting power, aim to control the government
and carry out their general policies‖.
-From these definitions it is clear that political parties are organized bodies and are primarily concerned
with the acquisition and retention of power.
Political parties are voluntary associations or organised groups of individuals who share the same
political views and who try to gain political power through constitutional means and who desire to work for
promoting the national interest.
There are three kinds of party systems in the world, viz., (i) one party system in which only one ruling
party exists and no opposition is permitted, as for example, in the former communist countries like the USSR
and other East European countries; (ii) two-party system in which two major parties exists, as for example, in
USA and Britain1; and (iii) multi-party system in which there are a number of political parties leading to the
formation of coalition governments, as for example, in France, Switzerland and Italy.

Following can be identified as their main characteristics:

 Political party is and the organized group of people believes in common principles and common goals.
 Its objectives revolve around seeking political power through collective efforts.
 It employs constitutional and peaceful methods in seeking control over the government through elections.
While in power, it translates its declared objectives into governmental policies.
FUNCTIONS OF POLITICAL PARTIES
 They nominate candidates during elections.
 They campaign to obtain support for their candidates in the elections.
 They place objectives and programmes before the voters through their manifestos.
 Those securing the majority in elections form the government and enact and implement the policies.
 Those not in power form opposition and keep a constant check on the government.
 They form opposition when they are in minority in the legislature and constantly put pressure on the
government for proper governance.
 They educate people and help in formulating and shaping public opinion.
 They articulate peoples-‘ demands and convey them to the government.
 They provide a linkage between people and governmental institutions.
INDIAN POLITICAL PARTIES: TYPES
Political parties in India are classified by the Election Commission for the allocation of symbols. The
Commission classifies parties into three main heads: National Parties, State Parties, and Registered
(unrecognized) Parties. The Election Commission grants political parties the status of national parties on three
grounds:
1. It should be a recognized political party in four or more states.
2. It should have won at least 4 per cent of the seats in the last Lok Sabha elections or 3.33 per cent of the
seats in the assembly elections from the state.
3. All the candidates put by the party should have polled at least 6 per cent of the total valid votes in the
elections.
The National Political Parties have areas of influence extending over the entire country. Since the last
general elections held in 2009 the recognized national political parties in India are: the Indian National
Congress (INC), the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Communist Party
of India (CPI), the Communist Party of India, Marxists (CPI-M), the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), and the
Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD).
The Regional Political Parties, as recognized by the Election Commission, are those political parties which
receive a certain amount of votes or seats in a State. The Election Commission grants election symbols to the
political parties and the candidates who contest elections. The number of regional political parties in the country
is fairly large. Some of the leading regional political parties in India include Trinamool Congress (West
Bengal), Assam Gana Parishad (Assam), All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (Tamil Nadu) Dravida
Munnetra Kazhagam (Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry), National Conference (Jammu and Kashmir), Samajwadi Party
(Uttar Pradesh, Uttrakhand), Shiromani Akali Dal (Punjab), Shiv Sena (Maharashtra), Telugu Desam (Andhra
Pradesh).
INDIAN POLITICAL PARTIES AND THEIR POLICIES
Every political party pronounces its policies and programmes as commitment to the electorate. These are
normally included in a document known as Manifesto. As you may be aware, Manifestoes are published by
political parties during elections. We may discuss the major policies of the following political parties.
The Indian National Congress: Founded in Bombay in 1885, the Indian National Congress (now the
Congress) played a leading role in India‘s freedom struggle. After independence the Congress emerged as the
leading party of governance and ruled at the Centre and in almost all the States till 1967. The first two decades
in India‘s political history were dominated by the Congress and the period came to be described as the
‗Congress System‘. The dominance of the Congress decreased gradually. Now it depended on coalition of
political parties to come to power in the Centre. The Congress is committed to democracy, secularism, and
socialism. It is, in a way, a centrist political party. While it champions the policy of liberalization, privatization,
globalization called ―LPG‖ on the one hand; it also works for the welfare of the weaker sections of society. It
advocates both agrarian based Indian economy and industrialization. It seeks to strengthen grassroots
institutions at the local level and claims to play a vital role in international institutions, especially in the United
Nations.
The Bharatiya Janata Party: Founded in 1980 after distancing itself from the then Janata Party, the
Bharatiya Janata Party is the new incarnation of its erstwhile formation, Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS). BJP is an
important political party both at the Centre as well as in some of the States. The BJP stands for (a) nationalism
and national integration, (b) democracy, (c) positive secularism, (d) Gandhian socialism, and (e) value–based
politics. Tilted towards the right in the initial stages, the BJP is as centrist as is the Congress now. The party has
formed governments in a number of States such as Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh, Gujarat, Karnataka and
Uttrakhand. The party is trying to expand its base in South and North-East India.
The Communist Parties: The major communist parties in India are the Communist Party of India (CPI),
founded in 1925 and the Communist Party of India, Marxist (CPI M) which came into being after the split in
the Communist Party of India in1964. Over the years, the CPI(M) became relatively more powerful than the
CPI. The CPI (M) and the CPI had been in power in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura. The Communist Parties
are workers‘ and peasants‘ parties. Based on the ideology of Marxism and Leninism, the Communist Parties
stand for socialism, socialist ownership of industries, agrarian reforms, rural upliftment and a self-reliant
economy. They are opposed to capitalism, imperialism and globalization
Nationalist Congress Party: The Nationalist Congress Party is a breakaway group of the Indian National
Congress. The trio who formed the party in 1999 included Sharad Pawar, P A Sangma and Tariq Anwar. The
party‘s policies are more or less same as that of the Congress. It has major support base in Maharashtra. It has
been a coalition partner of the Congress led UPA since 2004.
Regional Political Parties: Regional political parties have emerged to fulfill regional aspirations. They
became quite popular in their respective States that they have even begun dominating state politics and
capturing power in their respective States. Their enhanced political positions helped the national political parties
form coalition governments at the Centre. It is because of the regional political parties that our party-system has
been federalized. The Centre has begun to address their problems and respond their aspirations through
accommodation. The evolving nature of our party system has strengthened the cooperative trends of our federal
system.
Registered (unrecognized) Parties: A large number of political parties are registered at the Election
Commission, without having been recognized as National or State parties.
PARTY SYSTEM IN INDIA-NATURE
The Indian party system has the following characteristic features:
Multi-Party System
The continental size of the country, the diversified character of Indian society, the adoption of universal
adult franchise, the peculiar type of political process, and other factors have given rise to a large number of
political parties. In fact, India has the largest number of political parties in the world. At present (2013), there
are 6 national parties, 51 state parties and 1415 registered – unrecognized parties in the country2. Further, India
has all categories of parties—left parties, centrist parties, right parties, communal parties, non-communal parties
and so on. Consequently, the hung Parliaments, hung assemblies and coalition governments have become a
common phenomena.
One-Dominant Party System
In spite of the multiparty system, the political scene in India was dominated for a long period by the
Congress. Hence, Rajni Kothari, an eminent political analyst, preferred to call the Indian party system as ‗one
party dominance system‘ or the ‗Congress system‘ . The dominant position enjoyed by the Congress has been
declining since 1967 with the rise of regional parties and other national parties like Janata (1977), Janata Dal
(1989) and the BJP (1991) leading to the development of a competitive multi-party system.
Lack of Clear Ideology
Except the BJP and the two communist parties (CPI and CPM), all other parties do not have a clear-cut
ideology. They (i.e., all other parties) are ideologically closer to each other. They have a close resemblance in
their policies and programmes. Almost every party advocates democracy, secularism, socialism and Gandhism.
More than this, every party, including the so-called ideological parties, is guided by only one consideration—
power capture. Thus, politics has become issue-based rather than the ideology and pragmatism has replaced the
commitment to the principles.
Personality Cult
Quite often, the parties are organised around an eminent leader who becomes more important than the
party and its ideology. Parties are known by their leaders rather than by their manifesto. It is a fact that the
popularity of the Congress was mainly due to the leadership of Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi.
Similarly, the AIADMK in Tamil Nadu and TDP in Andhra Pradesh got identified with MG Ramachandran and
NT Rama Rao respectively. Interestingly, several parties bear the name of their leader like Biju Janata Dal, Lok
Dal (A), Congress (I) and so on. Hence, it is said that ―there are political personalities rather than political
parties in India‖.
Based on Traditional Factors
In the western countries, the political parties are formed on the basis of socio-economic and political
programme. On the other hand, a large number of parties in India are formed on the basis of religion, caste,
language, culture, race and so on. For example, Shiv Sena, Muslim League, Hindu Maha Sabha, Akali Dal,
Muslim Majlis, Bahujan Samaj Party, Republican Party of India, Gorkha League and so on. These parties work
for the promotion of communal and sectional interests and thereby undermine the general public interest.
Emergence of Regional Parties
Another significant feature of the Indian party system is the emergence of a large number of regional
parties and their growing role. They have become the ruling parties in various states like BJD in Orissa, DMK
or AIADMK in Tamil Nadu, Akali Dal in Punjab, AGP in Assam, National Conference in J&K, JD(U) in Bihar
and so on. In the beginning, they were confined to the regional politics only. But, of late, they have come to
play a significant role in the national politics due to coalition governments at the Centre. In the 1984 elections,
the TDP emerged as the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha.
Factions and Defections
Factionalism, defections, splits, mergers, fragmentation, polarisation and so on have been an important
aspect of the functioning of political parties in India. Lust for power and material considerations have made the
politicians to leave their party and join another party or start a new party. The practice of defections gained
greater currency after the fourth general elections (1967). This phenomenon caused political instability both at
the Centre and in the states and led to disintegration of the parties. Thus, there are two Janata Dals, two TDPs,
two DMKs, two Communist Parties, two Congress, three Akali Dals, three Muslim Leagues and so on.
Lack of Effective Opposition
An effective Opposition is very essential for the successful operation of the parliamentary democracy
prevalent in India. It checks the autocratic tendencies of the ruling party and provides an alternative
government. However, in the last 50 years, an effective, strong, organised and viable national Opposition could
never emerge except in flashes. The Opposition parties have no unity and very often adopt mutually conflicting
positions with respect to the ruling party. They have failed to play aconstructive role in the functioning of the
body politic and in the process of nation building.
Dominant Features of India’s Party System
The party system in India displays the following major characteristics:
India has a multi-party system with a large number of political parties competing to attain power at the
Centre as well as in the States.
The contemporary party system in India has witnessed the emergence of a bi-nodal party system existing at
both national and state/region levels. The bi-nodal tendencies operating at two poles are led by the Congress and
the BJP both at the center and in the states. Political parties are not hegemonic but competitive, though many a
time we see a particular party aligning with one national political party and then shifting to another on the eve
of general elections.
The regional political parties have come to play a vital role in the formation of governments at the Centre.
At the Centre, these regional parties support one national political party or the other and seek substantive
favours, ministerial berths at the Centre and other financial package for their respective States.
Election is now fought not among parties but coalition of parties. Nature of competition, alliance and
players is varied from state to state.
Coalitional politics has been a new feature of our party system. We have reached a situation where there is
no single party government, except in some of the States. There are, as you can see around, neither permanent
ruling parties nor permanent opposition parties.
As a result of coalitional politics, ideologies of the political parties have taken a back seat. Administration is
run through Common Minimum Programme, which reflects that pragmatism has become the ‗ruling mantra‘.
We have seen political situations where the Telugu Desam Party supported the BJP led NDA in 1999 and CPI
(M) backed the Congress led UPA in 2004 without formally joining the government.
Parties are keen on focusing on the single emotive issue/s to garner votes. The emotive issues in some of the
earlier elections were: Garibi Hatao of the 1970s, ‗Indira is India‘ of the 1980s, ‗Taking into the 21st Century‘
under Rajiv in mid-1980s, BJP‘ India Shining of 1999, Congress‘ ‗Feel Good‘ in 2004 and ‗Aam Aadmi‘ in
2009.
Parties now look for short term electoral gains rather than build lasting social coalitions.
RECOGNITION OF NATIONAL AND STATE PARTIES
The Election Commission registers political parties for the purpose of elections and grants them
recognition as national or state parties on the basis of their poll performance. The other parties are simply
declared as registered-unrecognised parties. The recognition granted by the Commission to the parties
determines their right to certain privileges like allocation of the party symbols, provision of time for political
broadcasts on the state-owned television and radio stations and access to electoral rolls. Every national party is
allotted a symbol exclusively reserved for its use throughout the country.
Similarly, every state party is allotted a symbol exclusively reserved for its use in the state or states in
which it is so recognised. A registered-unrecognised party, on the other hand, can select a symbol from a list of
free symbols. In other words, the Commission specifies certain symbols as ‗reserved symbols‘ which are meant
for the candidates set up by the recognised parties and others as ‗free symbols‘ which are meant for other
candidates.
Conditions for Recognition as a National Party:
At present (2013), a party is recognised as a national party if any of the following conditions is
fulfilled:
1. If it secures six per cent of valid votes polled in any four or more states at a general election to the Lok Sabha
or to the legislative assembly; and, in addition, it wins four seats in the Lok Sabha from any state or states; or
2. If it wins two per cent of seats in the Lok Sabha at a general election; and these candidates are elected from
three states; or
3. If it is recognised as a state party in four states.
Conditions for Recognition as a State Party :
At present (2013), a party is recognised as a state party in a state if any of the following conditions is fulfilled:
1. If it secures six per cent of the valid votes polled in the state at a general election to the legislative assembly
of the state concerned; and, in addition, it wins 2 seats in the assembly of the state concerned; or
2. If it secures six per cent of the valid votes polled in the state at a general election to the Lok Sabha from the
state concerned; and, in addition, it wins 1 seat in the Lok Sabha from the state concerned; or
3. If it wins three per cent of seats in the legislative assembly at a general election to the legislative assembly of
the state concerned or 3 seats in the assembly, whichever is more; or
4. If it wins 1 seat in the Lok Sabha for every 25 seats or any fraction thereof allotted to the state at a general
election to the Lok Sabha from the state concerned; or
5. If it secures eight per cent of the total valid votes polled in the state at a General Election to the Lok Sabha
from the state or to the legislative assembly of the state. This condition was added in 2011.
The number of recognised parties keeps on changing on the basis of their performance in the general elections.
At present (2013), there are 6 national parties, 51 state parties and 1415 registered unrecognised parties in the
country6. The national parties and state parties are also known as all-India parties and regional parties
respectively.

COALITION POLITICS IN INDIA

Indian political system takes place within the framework of a constitution. India is declared as a federal,
parliamentary, multi-party, representative-democratic, republic modeled after the British West Minister system.
According to its constitution, India is ―sovereign socialist, secular, democratic and republic‖. It has a
democratically elected government chosen by its largest population. As like any other democracy, political
party represent different sections among the Indian society and regions, and their core value place a major role
in the politics of India. India has a multi party system where there is number of national and regional political
parties existing in India because of which there is an emergence of coalition governments in India.
A coalition government is a cabinet of a parliamentary government in which several political parties
cooperates to reduce or to avoid the dominance of any one party within that coalition. The usual reason given
for this arrangement is that no party on its own can achieve a majority in the parliament. Coalition might also be
created in a time of national difficulty or economic crisis. (During the war time to give a government a high
degree of perceived political legitimacy) Dictionary of encyclopedia defines; it‘s an alliance for combined
action especially a temporary alliance of political parties forming a government or of a state‖.

The term ‗coalition‘ is derived from the Latin word ‗coalition‘ which is the verbal substantive
coalescere. Co means together and alescere means to go or to grow together. According to the dictionary
meaning, coalition means an act of coalescing, or uniting into one body, a union of persons, states or an
alliance. It is a combination of a body or parts into one whole. In the strict political sense the word ‗coalition‘ is
used for an alliance or temporary union for joint action of various powers or States and also of the union into a
single government of distinct parties or members of distinct parties.
After independence, The largest democracy has largely been ruled or governed by the single largest
party that is, of course, Indian national congress. Congress party since its inception in 1885 has evolved as the
most organized and vibrant force through every nock and corner of India. Since congress party has faced a lot of
music during India‘s freedom struggle from the White men not to exclude an ordinary Indian who might have
faced the British axe and not just music. Needless, to say the very existence of congress goes to the British
account. Bipin Chandra Beautifully articulates in his book ―History of modern India ―page 208 if Hume wanted
to use the congress as a ‗safety valve‘, the early congress leaders hoped to use him as a lightning conductor‘.
Once, called safety valve finally made British pay the huge price they had borrowed from the India in the name
of trade centuries ago and finally returned back to India in 1947 with unfortunate partition. The organized
congress party ruled India with no parallel or competition. The charisma of Nehru, Patel, and Azad had given
congress the yield that congress enjoyed until 1977.
Indian too has accumulated not inconsiderable amount of experience in the form of governing
arrangement. Undivided India got its first experience of coalition government in 1937 when the government of
India act, 1935 became operative. At the time Jinnah asked for a coalition consisting of congress and Muslim
league in UP but congress the party holding majority did not entertain this demand. Mohammad Ali Jinnah at
that time argued that in India coalition was the only respectable device to give to the Muslims a fair share in
governance in other states like NWFP and Punjab congress formed coalitions with other regional parties.
First experience of coalition in free India at the union level goes back to 1977 when non congress forces
united under the leadership of Morarji Desai in the name of janta government. Ram Monohar Lohia In 1963 had
propounded the strategy of Anti-Congressism or non- congressism. He was of the opinion that since in the past
three general elections the Congress had won with a thumping majority, there was a feeling among the masses
that the Congress could not be defeated and it had come to stay in power for ever. Lohia invited all the
Opposition parties to field a single candidate against Congress candidates so that the non congress votes won‘t
get divided and common masses could come out of the illusion that congress can‘t be defeated. This formula of
Dr. Lohia saw success in the 1967 general elections with the Congress party defeated in seven States and
Samyuktha Vidhayak Dal governments formed by the Opposition parties of the time. Lohia‘s fomula sowed the
seeds for coalition politics in india.The first coalition was formed under the experience of Morarji Desai .He
was the oldest man to become prime minister of India. The four party janta government remained in power for
about two years i.e, 1977-1979. The power struggle in the government did not allow Desai to continue anymore.
Once the no confidence motion against Desai was discussed in the lower house Mr. Desai tendered his
resignation. The Janta government collapsed like a house of cards in july 1979 when floodgates of defections
opened with the departure of various group leaders like George Fernandes , H.N.Bahuguna , Biju patnaik and
mudhu Limaye.
Second coalition, a new coalition was formed with Mr. Charan Singh as the prime minister in October
1979. He was the only prime minister who didn‘t face the parliament. This coalition had the support of CPI (M)
and the CPI. There was pro wast Fernandes and pro soviet Bahuguna faction in the coalition. On paper Charan
Singh had the absolute majority. But, once President asked him to seek a vote of confidence in the house within
three weeks time. Mr. Charan Singh tendered his resignation before facing the house. Hence became the first
Indian prime minster that did not face the house.
Third coalition was formed in the name of national front under the leadership of V.P. Singh in
December 1989.V.P.Singh government was supported by BJP and the then single largest party congress which
did not form the govt. as a political strategy. National front government had also the support of CPI,
CPI(M),The RSP and the Forward Block. But, the honeymoon period was short lived when BJP withdrew its
support to V.P. Singh on the eve of Advani‘s arrest on the backdrop of his Rath Yatra from somnath to Gujarat
despite BJP‘S warning to withdraw support if Advani is arrested. Though national front government remained
in power only for 11 months. The then Indian president R.Venketaraman observes, ―it is my impression that if
V.P. Singh had headed a government with a clear majority instead of depending on a conglomeration of parties
mutually destructive to each other, he would have given a good administration to the country. Being dependent
on parties with different objectives and ideologies, he could not with stand pressures from discordant groups‖
Fourth coalition,V.P.Singh‘s coalition government was defeated by 142 votes for and 346 against the
confidence motion on nov.7,1990 in the Lok Sabha.By nov.8,all major political parties declined to shoulder the
responsibility for administration. Chandra Shekhar had already staked his claim to form the government with
the help of the congress(i),the AIADMK, BSP, Muslim league ,j&k national conference ,Kerala
congress(M),Shiromni Akali Dal (panthic) and a few independent members. Chandra shekhar formed the
government on November 11 1990 despite the criticism that defectors should not have been invited to form
government. Chandra Shekhar offered his resignation on 6th march 1991 and advised for dissolution of house
on the issue of maintaining surveillance of Rajiv Gandhi by some Haryana policemen. The then President R.
Venkataraman‘s take on the leadership of Chandra shekhar government ―during his few months in office, he
had handled parliament competently and was responsive to suggestions from the opposition. He was under
constant strain from the pressures of the congress party, which I am afraid , assumed that it was the real
government and Chandra shekhar only a proxy.
Fifth coalition was formed under the leadership of H.D. Deve Gowda in the banner of united front
government. The United Front was a coalition government of 13 political parties including outside support of
congress, CPI, Other members of the front included the Samajwadi Party, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Asom
Gana Parishad, Tamil Maanila Congress, Communist Party of India and Telugu Desam Party. The united front
government headed by H.D.Deve Gowda was like a chariot being pulled at times in different direction by 13
horses. The Congress revoked its support to Gowda amidst discontent over communication between the
coalition and the Congress. Hence, the united front government lost the vote of confidence with 190 in favour
and 338 against.
Sixth coalition was headed by I.K.Gujral from 21st April 1997 to 19th march 1998 as a consensus
candidate between others that included Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mulayam Singh Yadav , INC,left parties and
others‘. The INC finally withdrew support from his government on 28 November after Gujral sent Kesri a letter
saying he would not dismiss any DMK leaders. Gujral resigned following the withdrawal and sent a letter to
President K. R. Narayanan that read: "My government has lost its majority and does not want to continue in
office on moral grounds‖. The president accepted the resignation, but asked for Gujral to stay on in an interim
capacity. The president finally dissolved parliament on 4 December once formation of government by any party
did not materialize.
Seventh coalition was led by A.B. Vajpayee from 19 march 1998 to 10th oct.1999.the BJP led coalition
was supported by AIADMK, BJD, Akali Dal, Shiv sena,PMK,TRC and others. This coalition of two many
parties did not last long since the demands of AIADMK were not met including the demand of Jayalalitha to
sack defence minister George Fernandes. It was but natural that she would withdraw her support and of course
she did not surprise anyone. Once Mr. Vaypayee moved confidence motion it was lost by one vote i.e., 269 in
favour and 270 against. Hence, Mr. Vaypayeee tendered his resignation to the president of India and came to an
end what was a shaky coalition.
India today observes: ―The BJP won 182 seats to retain its status as the single largest party in the 12th
Lok Sabha….if President K.R. Narayanan invites Vajpayee to head the next government, the BJP leader will be
a prisoner of his 13 disparate prepoll allies who hold 73 seats and a score of post poll friends who will
inevitably extract a steep price for their support.‖ India then appears to have entered a long season of coalition
governments. ― if the purpose of forming a coalition is to topple the existing government without any common
programme of action or approach, the Coalition, however, broadbased or cohesive it may be, would not provide
for stability and would in its turn be the victim of the same process of defections‖. As the former Governor of
Punjab D.C. Pavate viualised in his book ―Coalition Governments, Their Problems and Prospects.
Eighth coalition was formed after the 13th Lok sabha elections under the prime ministership of
A.B.Vajpayee from 11th October 1999 to 21st may 2004 under the flag of national democratic alliance(NDA)
led by BJP and supported by 24 political parties including AIADMK, Telgu Desam Party, NC, Trinimool
Congress, Shiv Sena ,Shiromani Akali Dal and others. The coalition led by Mr. Vajpayee had the support of
different shades of opinion. It was a coalition of ideologies, cultures, social fabrics, religions and above all
coalition of regions yet NDA was dominated by the upper and middle castes. ―the presence of the BJP as the
strong pillar in the coalition ,the charismatic leadership of A.B. Vajpayee and the skilfull way in which diverse
interestswere accommodated ensured the stability of the coalition government‖.
Nineth coalition was formed in may 2004 under the leadership of a stalwart economist Dr.Manmohan
singh in the name of united progressive alliance supported by Nationalist Congress Party with 9 MPs, Rashtriya
Lok Dal with 5 MPs, Jammu & Kashmir National Conference with3 MPs, Indian Union Muslim League with 3
MPs, Kerala Congress (Mani) with 1 MP and others including left parties. Outside support was given by
Samajwadi Party with 22 MPs, Bahujan Samaj Party with 21 MPs, Rashtriya Janata Dal with 4 MPs. On 8 July
2008, the national media had the breaking news that Prakash Karat, the general secretary of the Communist
Party of India (Marxist) (CPI, announced that the Left Front would be withdrawing support over Indo-U.S.
nuclear deal. Despite many ifs, buts, ought the government survived amid controversies over ―vote for cash‖
scam which is never a bombshell in coalitions.
The tenth coalition was formed by UPA 2nd in may 2009 headed by Dr. Manmohan singh as prime
minister for 2nd term after 15th Lok Sabha elections chaired by Shri Sonia Gandhi as was done in 2004 . India
held general elections to the 15th Lok Sabha in five phases between 16 April 2009 and 13 May 2009. With an
electorate of 714 million. (larger than the electorate of the European Union and United States combined. UPA
2nd was short of 10 seats to reach the magical number of 272 as required under rules to form government. UPA
2nd had the outside support of Samajwadi party with 23 mps, Bahujan Samaj party with 21, Rashtrya Janta Dal
with 4mps, Janta Dal secular with 3 mps, others with 3mps and others. Due to the fact that UPA was able to get
262 seats — just short of 10 seats for a majority — all the external support came from parties who gave
unconditional support to Manmohan Singh and the UPA. The Janata Dal (Secular), the Rashtriya Janata Dal, the
Bahujan Samaj Party and the Samajwadi Party all decided to do so to keep out any possibility of a BJP
government in the next 5 years.
On 18 September 2012, TMC Chief Mamta Banerjee, announced her decision to withdraw support to
the UPA after the TMC's demands of rollback of reforms including FDI in retail, increase in the price of diesel
and limiting the number of subsidized cooking gas cylinders for households, were not met. Likewise The DMK
pulled out of the UPA government on 19 March 2013 over the issue of a draft resolution at the United Nations
Human Rights Council of the alleged human rights' violations of Sri Lankan Tamils. Others who left the yoke
of UPA include people‘s democratic party, Jharkhand Vikas Morcha , All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen,
Pattali Makkal Katchi and others on many issues needless to delineate upon.the UPA 2nd played its full innings
despite BJP‘s criticism that ‗UPA is 100 not out in scams‘.What makes these coalitions work is the established
fact that there are no permanent enemies or friends in politics, if there is anything permanent that is interest.
India finally seems to have made a perennial entry in the world of coalitions. The above analysis clearly
depicts how hung parliaments become norm in the largest democracy with fragile or enduring impact. The
crumbling of political parties creates gloomy electoral circumstances in which hung parliaments become rule
rather than an exception. Nevertheless, Indian democratic politics so far has been lacking in the aptitude and the
culture of coalition forming and coalition maintaining succession of unhinged coalitions or minority
governments has made its own contribution to the crisis of the State as the state is inextricably mixed with the
webs of government.
The national Front Government

After the Janata Government the National Front under the leadership of V.P. Singh, the Defence
Minister in Rajiv Gandhi's Cabinet took an attempt to form a non-Congress government at the centre in 1988.
Singh's National Front government was an alliance among disparate individuals and parties to remain the
Congress (I) out of power. The alliance began to fall apart because of the partisan interests and personality
squabbles. V.P. Singh wanted to rise above factional politics, but he was encircled by ambitious colleagues and
diehard parties whose conspiracies and intrigues to nudge him out of office tempered his style of governance.
―The contradictory traits of his personality, exacerbated by situational imperatives, made him earnest and
Machiavellian, decisive and ambivalent, consistent and inconsistent at one and the same time.‖ His government
began searching for pro-Janata Party hacks to fill these positions. To ensure value-based politics his government
dismissed all state governors In January, 1990. Under the leadership of Prime Minister, P. V. N Simha Rao,
minority government was formed at the Centre in June 1991. On the one hand, the Rao government was
successful in initiating economic reforms, „it pursued liberalization and globalization much to the satisfaction of
the World Bank- International Monetary Fund (IMP) combine side by side it failed to promote value-based
politics. It sustained itself in power and made reasonable coalitions through buying support. The government
like the previous Congress regimes was not hesitant to use president's rule for partisan purpose in the arena of
federalism. Between 1991 and 1996, for a total of 11 incidents of president's rule, the Meghalaya Assembly
(non-Congress government, 1991) was suspended, but „revived after the Congress (I) was able to form the
government‟19, the Manipur Assembly (non-Congress, 1992; Congress I, 1994) was suspended twice, but
„revived in each case, after the Congress (I) formed the government.‟ All cases of Presidential dissolutions
involved non-Congress governments: Uttar Pradesh (1992, 1995); Nagaland (1992); Rajasthan (1992); Madhya
Pradesh (1992); Bihar; (1995) Himachal Pradesh (1992).

The United Front Government

The next Lok Sabha election held in April-May 1996 and it was witnessed a severely fractured verdict
with no one party or coalition being able to come anywhere near an absolute majority. It is a miracle that there
was a government at the centre after the parliamentary polls as the situation with the party system in disarray
and the political leadership in a worst ever crisis of credibility. Turmoil, besieged from within by disparate
regional leaders from different political parties and from without by the Congress (I) and the Marxists, the 13-
parties United Front government under the leadership of H.D. Deva Gowda muddles through-perhaps, until the
Congress ditched it. The Front might have faltered in promoting its hastily drawn 'Common Minimum
Programme' but it had stalled for some time, the saffronization of the centre much to the relief of minorities.
Nobody knew how the political universe would unfold within the few months and years, but none anticipated
realignment of political parties and leaders to provide stable situation in political arena. In that situation the
centre seemed fragile and suffered from power deflation and it was obviously constrained the analysis of future
itinerary of the political system and for the federal system in India.

The BJP-led Coalition

A rainbow coalition government was formed under the leadership of Atal Behari VaJpayee (a
combination of 17 parties and independents) and expect that the coalition would be more durable but this did
not happen. He started his term as prime minister on 19 March 1998 and resigned on 17 April 1999 as his
government lost a vote of confidence in the Lok Sabha by a single vote. His government also blamed by some
issues as for examples the BJP was ―a cadre-based, it opted for a consensual „National Agenda for
Governance‟, somewhat monolithic party, and ideologically committed to the promotion of Hindutva etc.‖ The
13th Lok Sabha election held on October 1999 (somewhat delayed because of Kargil war) and the BJP-Ied
omnibus alliance of 24 parties [the National Democratic Alliance (NDA)] got a comfortable working majority.
„The electoral verdict was still fractured but the NDA did well; it got a majority of about 30 seats which
enlivened its hope for a long stint in government under the leadership of Atal Behari Vajpayee who was sworn
in as prime minister (third time around) on 13th October 1999.‟To keep the NDA together, policy of a National
Agenda for Governance (NAG), sanitized for the BJP-allies, was drawn and the allies also cornered some key
portfolios in the Union Cabinet. On assuming office, Atal Behari Vajpayee promised bold economic reforms,
fiscal discipline, and a review of the constitution for better governmental stability, functional decentralisation,
judicial accountability, and financial autonomy tough the President of India did not favor such a review.‟
Except where the BJP's interests were at stake, the Vajpayee centre had been watchful but less intervening in
the making and unmaking of state governments. He asserted that "his Government truly believed in Federalism
and regional parties should have a say in the management of national affairs.‖ As a dominant governing party at
the centre, BJP entered into a variety of pre-poll and post-poll alliances to make its presence felt in all states. As
a political party it used the resources of the Centre to capture non-BJP territories mainly if the state
governments in these territories were well-entrenched and stable (e.g. most Southern States). Because of the
politics of defections, States like Meghalaya, Manipur, Goa, and Pondicherry have had turnover of governments
but the Vajpayee centre let the chips fall where they did. „Manipur came under President's rule (June 2001) as a
last resort failing due consultation with Congress President, Sonia Gandhi.‟ Uttar Pradesh experienced a brief
spell of presidential suspension of its legislative assembly following a divided mandate of the February 2002
polls.

United Progressive Alliance

The fourteenth Lok Sabha elections (April/May 2004) bought a change in the central government; the
BJP-Ied NDA government was replaced by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government. One of
the most important feature of Manmohan Singh-led UPA is that in many state level based parties and groups
which agreed to participate in the government, supported from outside by the Communist block of MPs. They
have interpreted that their mandate is to promote and solidify the secular forces and transform Indian democracy
with a view to bring comfort to millions of unemployed rural and urban youth and the neglected agrarian
Indian. To improve the Centre-State relations, it was focused on growing regional imbalances, both among
states as well as within states, through administrative, fiscal, investment and other means. The party believed
that regional imbalances have been created by not just historical neglect, but also by distortions of resources and
central government assistance. The Government will consider the creation of a Backward State and that basis
they used to create productive assets in these states. The government used the National Development Council as
more effective instrument of cooperative federalism. To strengthen the Centre-State relations, this government
is committed to set-up a new commission keeping in view the sea-changes that have taken place in the polity
and economy of India. The issue of centre-state relations was last looked at by the Sarkaria Commission over a
decade ago. The 15th Lok Sabha held in 2009 (between 16 April 2009 and 13 May 2009), the tenth coalition
was also formed by UPA 2nd headed by Dr. Manmohan singh as prime minister for 2nd term and also this
elections chaired by Sonia Gandhi. The tenth coalition was able to get 262 seats — just short of 10 seats for a
majority. The UPA 2nd was gotten unconditional supports from Samajwadi party with 23 MPs, Bahujan Samaj
party with 21 MPs, Rashtrya Janta Dal with 4mps, Janta Dal secular with 3 mps, and the others. These all
parties are supported to UPA 2nd as they wanted to keep out any possibility of a BJP government in the next 5
years. The tenth coalition was more often in the news headlines for 2G scam, coal mines scam, MGNREGA
scam, common wealth games scam etc. After the TMC's demands of rollback of reforms including FDI in retail,
increase in the price of diesel and limiting the number of subsidized cooking gas cylinders for households, the
TMC Chief Mamta Banerjee, announced her decision to withdraw support to the UPA on 18 September 2012.
Likewise the DMK withdrew support from UPA government over the issue of a draft resolution at the United
Nations Human Rights Council of the alleged human rights' violations of Sri Lankan Tamils on 19 March 2013.

The Third BJP-led Coalition 2014

The 16th Lok Sabha held in 2014 and the National Democratic Alliance won a sweeping victory, taking
336 seats and the BJP itself won 282 seats. After 1984, it is the first time in Indian General Election that a party
has won enough seats to form the government without the support of other parties. The United Progressive
Alliance, headed by Indian National Congress, won only 58 seats. This was the worst defeat in a general
election of the United Progressive Alliance.

CONCUSSION

In Indian political system, coalition politics is a matter of fact. Today every citizen of Indian is bound to
accept that era of coalition politics has now fully dawned. All the National parties are now fully realised the fact
that none of them can singly get a majority at least in the near future. India‘s mother political party Congress
which is in power at centre nearly 40 years also now fully aware of the fact that they need to form some sort of
coalition group to occupy the power at the centre and states. The last few decades we are witnessed that how the
hung parliaments become as permanent feature of the largest democracy with enduring impact.

INTEREST GROUPS AND PRESSURE GROUPS

Meaning and Techniques

The term ‗pressure group‘ originated in the USA. A pressure group is a group of people who are
organised actively for promoting and defending their common interest. It is so called as it attempts to bring a
change in the public policy by exerting pressure on the government. It acts as a liaison between the government
and its members.
The pressure groups are also called interest groups or vested groups. They are different from the
political parties in that they neither contest elections nor try to capture political power. They are concerned with
specific programmes and issues and their activities are confined to the protection and promotion of the interests
of their members by influencing the government. The pressure groups influence the policy-making and policy-
implementation in the government through legal and legitimate methods like lobbying, correspondence,
publicity, propagandizing, Petitioning, public debating, maintaining contacts with their legislators and so forth.
However, sometimes they resort to illegitimate and illegal methods like strikes, violent activities and corruption
which damages public interest and administrative integrity.
According to Odegard, pressure groups resort to three different techniques in securing their purposes.
First, they can try to place in public office persons who are favorably disposed towards the interests they seeks
to promote. This technique may be labeled electioneering. Second, they can try to persuade public officers,
whether they are initially favorably disposed toward them or not, to adopt and enforce the policies that they
think will prove most beneficial to their interests. This technique may be labeled lobbying. Third, they can try to
influence public opinion and thereby gain an indirect influence over government, since the government in a
democracy is substantially affected by public opinion. This technique may be labeled propagandizing.
 CHARACTERISTICS OF PRESSURE GROUPS
To have a proper understanding of pressure groups we must try to familiarize ourselves with the various
characteristics of pressure groups.
1. Based on Certain Interests-
Each pressure group organises itself keeping in view certain interests and thus tries to adopt the structure
of power in the political systems. In every government and political party there are clashing interest groups.
These groups try to dominate the political structure and to see that groups whose interests clash with theirs are
suppressed. Thus, each political party and system is pressurised by certain interest groups which may be similar
or reactionary to each other.
2. Use of Modern as well as Traditional Means
Another characteristic feature of pressure groups is that they try to follow modem means of exerting
pressure, without fully giving up the traditional or old ways of operation. They adopt techniques like financing
of political parties, sponsoring their close candidates at the time of elections and keeping the bureaucracy also
satisfied. Their traditional means include exploitation of caste, creed and religious feelings to promote their
interests.
3. Resulting Out of Increasing Pressure and Demands on Resources
As the resources of developing countries are usualIy scarce, there are cIaims and counter claims on their
resources from different and competing sections of the society. In such a situation, there has to be a process of
allocation. The public policies thus become the devices through which allocation takes place. However, the
allocation process has to be accompanied by certain amount of authority for the demands of all the groups
cannot be satisfied. In the process certain other groups are denied the benefits. Those who are denied the
benefits are found to be unhappy and do express their resentment through different forms. This may range from
mild protests to violent outbursts. In such a situation the allocator of values, viz., the State employs different
techniques to contain the movement or meet the protest. At ideological level the State would claim legitimacy
of its authority to allocate the values. If the legitimacy claim is accepted then the conflicts get resolved in a
more orderly fashion. If the claims for the legitimacy are rejected, the State employs force and justifies it on the
grounds of legitimacy and maintenance of order in the general interest of the society.
The pressure groups take birth in this process. In every society there is a continuous generation of demands.
In developing countries like India, where around forty per cent population is below the poverty line, the
demands emanate from the basic physical requirements of human beings. There are demands not only for food
and basic needs but demands for work and opportunities. It is significant to note that the pressure for these
demands has come more from the elite than the poor people themselves. Although there is restlessness, it has
not acquired a concrete form in terms of poor peoples' organisation. The poor continue to be one of the most
unorganized segments of the society with the result their problems do not get articulated sufficiently and
pressure applied is not adequate to extract the share that is due to them.
4. Alternative to Inadequacies of Political Parties
Pressure groups are primarily a consequence of inadequacies of the political parties. The political parties are
expected to articulate the demands of different deprived and dominant interests in the system. They are also
expected to organise and mobilise the support structure to various demands. In India, the spectrum of political
parties indicates that while all of them do talk of the poor and other deprived sections and give prominent place
to their problems in their manifestoes, a larger number of them neither have the capacity nor the political will to
organise the poor. Thus, the political parties leave a wide gap in the system. This gap is not filled by the
pressure groups either. This is due to the inability of the poorer sections to organise themselves. The political
parties have not been able to present the interests of the dominant groups as adequately and fully as one woulcl
expect them to do. Most of the political parties compete for the same social base. With the result there is not
much difference between one party programme and the other. This has left enormous gaps in the socio-
economic system of the country. These gaps have come to be filled up by the pressure groups. In a mixed
economy where the state has opted for planned development, the dominant interests are always suspicious of
the intentions of the state. This gives rise to organised pressure groups as a counter-check to politics and
political parties. For -instance, the Acts like Monopolies Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) or land reforms
 can always be a source of doubt about the real intentions of the policy formulators. That is the reason why the
dominant interests are alert throu& pressure groups. Another reason why political system leaves considerable
space for pressure groups is the continuous regulations and restrictions imposed by the political system. From
obtaining a licence to selling a product in the market, there is presence of the State. Th is\ is a highly
bureaucratised process. The interest or pressure groups not only need to.have a highly organised pressure
system but maintain middlemen, liaison officer, hidden persuaders and so on. They adopt several methods to
extract the favours from the system on the one hand and circumvent highly impending procedures, rules and
regulations on the other. The political parties because of their dependence on the poor voters do not publicly
plead for the course of the dominant interests. On the contrary their rhetoric is anti-dominant social groups. This
gives rise to pressure groups.
5. Represent Changing ~consciousness
Pressure groups are a sign of changing consciousness. The consciousness of different groups goes on
changing as the result (I) changing material conditions; and (ii) increasing politicisation. The change in the
material conditions leads to higher level consciousness. For instance the increase in the food production or
industrial goods does bring a change in the way individuals and groups look at the world. The stagnation in
production leads to fatalism but increase in the production leads to demands, protests and formation of new
pressure groups. This is the initial expression of the changes in material conditions. This also leads to
sharpening of the political processes. The political parties and political groups try to mobilize various groups by
raising new demands or articulating the new aspirations. The people at large respond to those processes as they
enter a new phase of consciousness. Thus, the changing material conditions and consciousness create a 'new
situation for the rise of pressures and in turn the pressure groups.
The pressures arising from competition are, in fact, the real arena of pressure group phenomenon. The poor and
the deprived sections lack the capacity to organise themselves, therefore, they are usually organised or
represented by the elite for upper strata. That is why the nature of pressure that is applied on behalf of the poor
would be different from the pressure that the better off sections apply on the society. The better off sections who
are locked up in competition from the limited resources of the society employ all the methods possible to extract
Maximum benefits from the system. It is in understanding the modes and methods that these groups adopt; our
awareness of the problem gets enlarged.
In present times, the role of some movements, for protection of rights of people, has become significant.
They are playing the role of a pressure group. For example, the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) movement
has generated consciousness amongst the people in questioning the actions of government regarding dam
construction and its repercussions.
Similarly, in the State of Rajasthan, a people's organisation known as Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sanghthan
(MKSS), could succeed in making the people question and demand information on money spent on roads; loans
to poor and so on. This made the basis for the right to information movement. People are exerting their rights to
get information from the government regarding activities that rightfully concerns them.

TYPES OF PRESSURE GROUPS

Different writers on comparative government have classified interest groups or pressure groups on the
basis of their structure and organisation. According to Almond and Powell, interest groups can be classified into
four categories:

I. Institutional Interest Groups

II. The Associational Interest Groups
III. Anomic Interest Groups
IV. Non-Associational Interest Groups

1. Institutional Interest Groups

These groups are formally organised which consist of professionally employed persons. They are a part of
government machinery and try to exert their influence. But they do have much autonomy. These groups include
 political parties, legisla-tures, armies, bureaucracies and churches. An example of institutional group can be the
West Bengal Civil Se-rvices Association. Whenever such an association raises protest it does so by
constitutional means and in accordance with the rules and regulations.
2. Associational Interest Groups
These are organised specialised groups formed for interest articulation, but to pursue limited goals. These
include trade unions, organisations of businessmen and industrialists and civic groups. Some examples of
Associational Interest Groups in India are Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Indian Chambers of
Commerce, Trade Unions such as AITUC (All India Trade Union Congress), Teachers Associations, Students
Associations such as National Students Union of India (NSUI) etc.
3. Anomic Interest Groups
These are the groups that have analogy with individual self-representation. In such type of groups,
perpetual infiltrations such as riots, demonstrations are observed. These groups are found in the shape of
movement demonstrations and processions, signature campaigns, street corner meetings, etc. Their activities
may either be constitutional or unconstitutional.
4. Non-Associational Interest Groups
These are the kinship and lineage groups and ethnic, regional, status and class groups that articulate
interests on the basis of individuals, family and religious heads. These groups have informal structure. These
include caste groups, language groups, etc.

PRESSURE GROUPS IN INDIA

A large number of pressure groups exist in India. But, they are not developed to the same extent as in the
US or the western countries like Britain, France, Germany and so on. The pressure groups in India can be
broadly classified into the following categories:
1. Business Groups
The business groups include a large number of industrial and commercial bodies. They are the most
sophisticated, the most powerful and the largest of all pressure groups in India. They include:
(i) Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI); major constituents are the Indian
Merchants Chamber of Bombay, Indian Merchants Chamber of Calcutta and South Indian Chamber of
Commerce of Madras. It broadly represents major industrial and trading interests.
(ii) Associated Chamber of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM); major constituents are the
Bengal Chamber of Commerce of Calcutta and Central Commercial Organisation of Delhi. ASSOCHAM
represents foreign British capital.
(iii) Federation of All India Foodgrain Dealers Association (FAIFDA). FAIFDA is the sole
representative of the grain dealers.
(iv) All-India Manufacturers Organisation (AIMO). AIMO raises the concerns of the mediumsized
industry.
2. Trade Unions
The trade unions voice the demands of the industrial workers. They are also known as labour groups. A
peculiar feature of trade unions in India is that they are associated either directly or indirectly with different
political parties. They include:
(i) All-India Trade Union Congress (AITUC)—affiliated to CPI;
(ii) Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC)—affiliated to the Congress (I);
(iii) Hind Mazdoor Sabha (HMS)—affiliated to the Socialists;
(iv) Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU)—affiliated to the CPM;
(v) Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS)—affiliated to the BJP;
(vi) All India Central Council of Trade Unions (Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist)
Liberation);
(vii) All India United Trade Union Centre (Socialist Unity Centre of India (Communist));
(viii)New Trade Union Initiative (Independent from political parties, but left);
(ix) Labour Progressive Federation (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam);
(x) Trade Union Coordination Committee (All India Forward Bloc);
(xi) United Trade Union Congress (Revolutionary Socialist Party);
(xii) All India Centre of Trade Unions (Marxist Communist Party of India (United));
(xiii)Anna Thozhil Sanga Peravai (All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam);
(xiv)Bharatiya Kamgar Sena (Shiv Sena);
(xv) Hind Mazdoor Kisan Panchayat (Janata Dal (United));
(xvi)Indian Federation of Trade Unions (Communist Party of India Marxist- Leninist) New
Democracy);
(xvii)Indian National Trinamool Trade Union Congress (All India Trinamool Congress);
(xviii)Pattali Trade Union (Pattali Makkal Katchi);
(ix) Swatantra Thozhilali Union (Indian Union Muslim League); and
(xx) Telugu Nadu Trade Union Council (Telugu Desam Party).
First Trade Union in India: All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) was founded in 1920 with Lala
Lajpat Rai as its first president. Upto 1945, Congressmen, Socialists and Communists worked in the AITUC
which was the central trade union organisation of workers of India. Subsequently, the trade union movement got
split on political lines.
3. Agrarian Groups
The agrarian groups represent the farmers and the agricultural labour class. They include:
(i) Bhartiya Kisan Union (under the leadership of Mahendra Singh Tikait, in the wheat belt of North
India)
(ii) All India Kisan Sabha (the oldest and the largest agrarian group)
(iii) Revolutionary Peasants Convention (organised by the CPM in 1967 which gave birth to the
Naxalbari Movement)
(iv) Bhartiya Kisan Sangh (Gujarat)
(v) R V Sangham (led by C N Naidu in Tamil Nadu)
(vi) Shetkhari Sanghatana (led by Sharad Joshi in Maharashtra)
(vii) Hind Kisan Panchayat (controlled by the Socialists)
(viii)All-India Kisan Sammelan (led by Raj Narain)
(ix) United Kisan Sabha (controlled by the CPM)
4. Professional Associations
These are associations that raise the concerns and demands of doctors, lawyers, journalists and teachers.
Despite various restrictions, these associations pressurise the government by various methods including
agitations for the improvement of their service conditions. They include:
(i) Indian Medical Association (IMA)
(ii) Bar Council of India (BCI)
(iii) Indian Federation of Working Journalists (IFWJ)
(iv) All India Federation of University and College Teachers (AIFUCT)
5. Student Organisations
Various unions have been formed to represent the student community. However, these unions, like the
trade unions, are also affiliated to various political parties. These are:
(i) Akhila Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) (affiliated to BJP)
(ii) All India Students Federation (AISF) (affiliated to CPI)
(iii) National Students Union of India (NSUI) (affiliated to Congress (I))
(iv) Progressive Students Union (PSU) (affiliated to CPM)
6. Religious Organisations
The organisations based on religion have come to play an important role in Indian politics. They
represent the narrow communal interest. They include:
(i) Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS)
(ii) Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP)
(iii) Jamaat-e-Islami
 (iv) Ittehad-ul-Mussalmeen
(v) Anglo-Indian Association
(vi) Associations of the Roman Catholics
(vii) All-India Conference of Indian Christians
(viii)Parsi Central Association
7. Caste Groups
Like religion, caste has been an important factor in Indian politics. The competitive politics in many
states of the Indian Union is in fact the politics of caste rivalries: Brahmin versus Non-Brahmin in Tamil Nadu
and Maharashtra, Rajput versus Jat in Rajasthan, Kamma versus Reddy in Andhra, Ahir versus Jat in Haryana,
Baniya Brahmin versus Patidar in Gujarat. Kayastha versus Rajput in Bihar, Nair versus Ezhava in Kerala and
Lingayat versus Okkaliga in Karnataka3. Some of the caste-based organisations are:
(i) Nadar Caste Association in Tamil Nadu
(ii) Marwari Association
(iii) Harijan Sevak Sangh
(iv) Kshatriya Maha Sabha in Gujarat
(v) Vanniyakul Kshatriya Sangam
(vi) Kayastha Sabha
8. Tribal Organisations
The tribal organisations are active in MP, Chattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal and the North
Eastern States of Assam, Manipur, Nagaland and so on. Their demands range from reforms to that of secession
from India and some of them are involved in insurgency activities. The tribal organisations include:
(i) National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN)
(ii) Tribal National Volunteers (TNU) in Tripura
(iii) People‘s Liberation Army in Manipur
(iv) All-India Jharkhand
(v) Tribal Sangh of Assam
(vi) United Mizo Federal Organisation
9. Linguistic Groups
Language has been so important factor in Indian politics that it became the main basis for the
reorganisation of states. The language along with caste, religion and tribe have been responsible for the
emergence of political parties as well as pressure groups. Some of the linguistic groups are:
(i) Tamil Sangh
(ii) Anjuman Tarraki-i-Urdu
(iii) Andhra Maha Sabha
(iv) Hindi Sahitya Sammelan
(v) Nagari Pracharani Sabha
(vi) Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha
10. Ideology Based Groups
In more recent times, the pressure groups are formed to pursue a particular ideology, i.e., a cause, a
principle or a programme. These groups include:
(i) Environmental protection groups like Narmada Bachao Andolan, and Chipko Movement
(ii) Democratic rights organisations
(iii) Civil liberties associations
(iv) Gandhi Peace Foundation
(v) Woman rights organisations
11. Anomic Groups
Almond and Powell observed: ―By anomic pressure groups we mean more or less a spontaneous
breakthrough into the political system from the society such as riots, demonstrations, assassinations and the like.
The Indian Government and bureaucratic elite, overwhelmed by the problem of economic development and
scarcity of resources available to them, inevitably acquires a technocratic and anti-political frame of mind,
particularistic demands of whatever kinds are denied legitimacy. As a consequence interest groups are alienated
from the political system‖. Some of the anomic pressure groups are:
(i) All-India Sikh Student‘s Federation.
(ii) Nava Nirman Samithi of Gujarat.
(iii) Naxalite Groups.
CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS
Pressure groups are now considered as an indispensable and helpful element of the democratic process.
The society has become highly complex and individuals cannot pursue their interests on their own. They need
the support of other fellow beings in order to gain greater bargaining power; this gives rise to pressure groups
based on common interests. For a long time these groups remained unnoticed, initially they were considered as
harmful for the democratic process, but now their role in the political process has become very important.
Democratic politics has to be politics through consultation, through negotiation and some amount of bargaining
is also involved. Thus, it is very essential for the government to consult these organised groups at the time of
policy formulation and implementation.
Thus, we saw that pressure groups are a very important part of any system. No administrative and
political set up can function without the advice and cooperation of pressure groups. The Unit explained the
meaning and importance of pressure groups. An attempt was made to discuss the nature of pressure groups in
India and their methods of operation. The different types of pressure groups that exist in any political and
administrative system were highlighted upon. The problems of pressure groups and need to overcome them
were also clearly dealt with.
ROLE OF MEDIA IN DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
Democracy and Media are two major elements in the process of Development, as development is no
longer viewed as the sole responsibility of the elected governments. In spite of the policy initiatives, the
governments need people's participation in the development and the various democratic processes like elections,
movements and public debates help in securing it. The Media, including the news media, too provides a forum
for public debate on the issues of development apart from providing information regarding such issues.
In this era of globalization, the media has emerged as one of the most powerful components of social
management. The role of mass media in shaping the public opinion is well known. However, some
communication experts and social scientists think that opinion leaders have more significant role in shaping the
public opinion. But from the days of Capitalist revolution, the press was accorded the status of the fourth estate
for no other reason than its power to influence the minds and thus accelerate the political process in favor of
bourgeois democracy.
In this Unit, we shall understand the role of media in the policy making in general and public policy in
particular. The role of media is twofold. On the one hand, the media influences the policy makers by putting
forth the opinions expressed by various groups including educationists, journalists and experts, leaders of
different political parties, religious leaders, workers and peasants Unions, etc. On the other hand, the media
pressurizes the policy makers or the authorities to act in response to people's interest and demands by opening a
debate and educate the masses. We shall also discuss the impact of globalization and technological
advancement on the process of democratization as well as on media and social development.
The modern democratic states with their lofty ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity regulated the
political process of the nations with the help of Parliament (Legislature), Government (Executive) and the
Court (Judiciary). It declared the press as the fourth pillar of democracy. The Press then became the prime agent
of free debate in Europe and America.
Modern Democracies and the Press
The media is increasingly intertwined with the practice of democracy in various countries. Government
officials and political candidates use the media to advance their agendas. People rely more and more on the
media to judge how their leaders campaign, govern, shape public policy, and communicate their ideas.
Curiously, this increase in media influence corresponds to a decrease in voter participation. In order to be well-
informed citizens and active participants in our democracy, people must understand both our governing
processes and the role of the media in them. Common citizens have a great deal of exposure to the media in the
realms of entertainer and culture, yet most do not understand how the media, politics, and public policy interact
1

with each other and thereby affect their lives. What they need is to know these things in order to become more
thoughtful "consumers" of media messages related to politics. How can we challenge them to explore the
changing relationships between the media and democracy? These are some of the questions that educators,
journalists, media leaders, and citizens must explore together.
The modern democracies have witnessed the complex and increasingly critical relationship between
media and public policy. In a society where a 24'7 news cycle bombiirds a fractured public, where
'infotainment' and the 'argument culture' often overshadow traditional journalism, it has become more difficult
to focus public debate and build political consensus necessary to shape, lead or change public policy. Polls,
focus groups, talking points, sound-bitten debates, massive spending by special interests and corporate
ratings/circulation pressures can distort and overshadow important issues. It has become imperative on students
of media and public policy to know hour these forces collide in our modern media. Equally important is to
examine how coverage decisions regarding public policy are made ‗in newsrooms, how advocates use and rely
on the media to advance their message and hob different media reflect different str<engths and vulnerabilities.
New Media Technologies and Democracy
The emergence of Information Technologies and the convergence of various communication
technologies have changed the nature of media. The media, which earlier meant the press alone, now
included radio, television and computers to make it much wider than ever before. However, the growing
use of Information Technology has brought many new 'changes in the nature of press. The information is
readily available on the net, which has reduced the dependence of the readers or citizens on Newspapers.
The Governments world over are now not only using internet for providing information to its citizens, but
are promoting the use of the internet and other digital technologies to transact day to day business like
submitting applications, filling the forms, issuing orders and notices, etc. It is this use of digital technology
that is known as e-governance.
The spread of the computers and the Internet is limited for the time being. But with more and more
rationalization of costs of IT and telecommunication facilities, the new media technologies would have a
greater freedom of expression as the public or private control on the content is much less in new media than
other technologies like press, radio and television. The earlier media were allowed the freedom so that they
would be able to represent the people, but due to the cost of technologies and their management, the
ownership of these media had the privilege of selecting their own content. Now with the e-governance and
seemingly lack of control of the Internet, the government and the people have a live channel for
communication and more and more interest groups are networking with other people of similar interest and
are also able to manipulate public opinion on certain issues.
Media and the Public Opinion
It can be said with certainty that media shapes the public opinion to some extent. There have been
various studies that have shown that media is not the only agent of shaping the people's perception. During
the US Presidential elections in 1940, Paul E. Lazarfeld and others conducted a research and found that
Mass media had no direct influence in the decision making of the people. In their book entitled "The
People's Choice", they described the interpersonal relationships, peer group pressures and the opinion
leaders as some of the major factors for shaping the public opinion. However, the role of mass media was
not negated altogether in the two step flow of information model as the mass media was seen as a major
player in disseminating the information to the people including the opinion leaders.
The communication theorists in the 1970s again emphasized the role of media in molding the public
perception. George Garbner (1967) worked on the Cultivation Theory in which he described the media as
molders of the society. He believed that Mass media has subtle effect on people's perception as he
described the media as cultivators of dominant image patterns due to long and persistent exposure. His
researches were in tune with the time as, during that period, advertising had made enough impact on the
society. Later, the media and politics relationships were investigated and analysed by Maxwell McCombe
and Donald Shaw (1972) who explored the role, the media played in the agenda setting during the election.
The Agenda setting theorists hold that the media is successful in telling the people "what is to think about" than
in telling them ''What to think". This theory depends upon the study of media where the significance given to
certain issues by media were compared with the importance given to the same issues by people and politicians.
It says .that over a period of time, the priority given to certain issues by media become the public priorities as
well. Other scholars of media have provided us with alternative theories of Mass Media, but here we would
discuss two other theories. Melvin de Fleur and Sandra Ball-Rokeztch proposed the Dependency theory in
which certain social and psychological factors prevent media from exercising control over their audiences. As
they say, "Mass Media not only lack arbitrary influence powers, but also their personal lack of freedom to
engage in arbitrary communication behaviour. Both media and their audiences are integral part of their society.
The surrounding socio-cultural context provides controls and constraints not only on the nature of media
messages but also on the nature of their effects on audiences." The other relevant theory is called the
Development Communication theory which was formulated during the efforts of McBride Commission to study
the Communication problems of developing societies. The absence of communication infrastructure, the
dependence on the developed world for hardware and software were some of these problems. The common
commitment of these societies to economic, political and social development as the primary national task and
the need to idenl.ify countries with similar interests and identities in international politics were the objectives
that these countries wanted to achieve. The major concern of the development communication theorists was to
find the means to use media for development prograrnrnes like poverty alleviation, population control, literacy
drive, employment generation scheme, etc. The effectiveness of this theory depends upon the governments as
they could restrict the freedom or intervene in media operations by legislating policies. It is evident from the
above facts that the media is a powerful tool of disseminating information, educating people on major issues
and also of entertaining them. It is the power of media to influence the public opinion which sometime forces
the governments to impose draconian measures like censorship.