The recent developments surrounding the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and its factions have brought to light significant issues regarding political symbols, party recognition, and internal democracy within political parties in India.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) founder Sharad Pawar has approached the Supreme Court, seeking to prevent the Ajit Pawar faction from using the ‘clock’ symbol in the upcoming Maharashtra Assembly elections.

Election Commission’s powers in a dispute over election symbols

• Political symbols are allocated by the Election Commission of India (ECI) based on the Symbols Order. 

• Recognised political parties have reserved symbols that are not assigned to any other candidates in any constituency. This is crucial for a largely illiterate electorate.

• Before 1968, the ECI primarily issued notifications and executive orders under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. This framework was utilised to manage elections and political party recognition.

• One of the most notable political splits before 1968 occurred in the Communist Party of India (CPI) in 1964.

• A faction of the CPI, which later identified itself as the CPI (Marxist), approached the ECI in December 1964, requesting recognition as a separate party.

• The breakaway group presented a list of Members of Parliament and Members of the Legislative Assembly from Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, and West Bengal who supported their faction.

What is the dispute about?

• The NCP split in July 2023, with the Ajit Pawar faction claiming support from 41 of the 53 MLAs in Maharashtra. 

• In February 2024, the ECI recognised the Ajit Pawar faction as the “real” NCP and allotted it the ‘clock’ symbol, while the Sharad Pawar faction received a new symbol of ‘man blowing turha’.

• The plea argues that this has caused voter confusion about which faction represents the real NCP, leading to a request to freeze the ‘clock’ symbol.

Criteria for recognition of factions:

The Supreme Court established a three-test formula in Sadiq Ali vs ECI (1971) to determine faction recognition based on:

i) Aims and objectives of the party

ii) Internal democracy as per the party’s constitution

iii) Majority support in the legislative and organisational wings.

• The EC’s recent decision leaned heavily on the legislative majority, leading to challenges from the NCP (SP). In the recent Lok Sabha elections, the NCP (SP) faction won eight seats with its new symbol, while the Ajit Pawar faction won only one seat with the ‘clock’ symbol. This performance raises questions about the legitimacy of the EC’s recognition of the Ajit Pawar faction.

What happens to the group that doesn’t get the parent party’s symbol?

• During the first split in the Indian National Congress, both factions were recognised by the ECI. For instance, the Congress (O) faction, led by Jagjivan Ram, received recognition due to its substantial presence in various states and its compliance with the criteria established under the Symbols Order.

• However, following the various splits within the Congress and Janata Dal, the ECI revised its approach in 1997. 

• This revision was particularly evident in disputes that led to the formation of several new parties, including the Himachal Vikas Congress (led by Sukh Ram), Manipur State Congress (led by Nipamacha Singh), Trinamool Congress (led by Mamata Banerjee), Rashtriya Janata Dal (led by Lalu Prasad Yadav), and Biju Janata Dal (led by Naveen Patnaik).

• The ECI established a new policy stating that simply having elected representatives (MPs and MLAs) was not enough for a faction to gain recognition. The rationale was that these representatives had previously contested elections on the parent party’s tickets, and thus, their electoral success was tied to the parent party’s brand.

(The author is a trainer for Civil Services aspirants.)