The meaning of the 2019 mandate

The BJP-Sena divided the state’s 288 constituencies between themselves, went to voters with their record of the last five years, and asked to be re-elected.

It should have been an open and shut case of a BJP-Shiv Sena government being sworn in within a day or two of the Maharashtra Assembly election result. Instead, the two allies with an absolute majority have spent a week snaring off each other. They are pre-poll allies – together, they won 161 seats of 288 in the Assembly, considerably more than the Congress-NCP tally of 98, and as such, have the mandate to govern the state. In doing the shenanigans they have during the last week – not meeting formally, not working out a power-sharing arrangement or the contours of 50-50 split, calling out the other through the media – they have demeaned and dishonoured the mandate.

In not forming the government and continuing to shadow-fight for a week, they have signalled to voters that their five years ahead in power together will be fraught with disagreements, constant carping, even open rebellion. Their tenure in the last five was hardly pleasant, the next five, if they assume power, could be worse. But beyond this, the perception is that neither party has fully grasped the meaning of this mandate.

The BJP-Sena divided the state’s 288 constituencies between themselves, went to voters with their record of the last five years, and asked to be re-elected. The result showed that voters were not impressed with the record, did not believe in the new promises made, and their policy to import leaders from other parties did not work. They dropped seats – BJP from 122 to 105, Sena from 63 to 56 – and their collective vote share by five per cent. Each party has its rebels who won against the official candidate.

If leaders in both parties would reflect, they would realise that the mandate is a reality check for them, their bluster of mega-project led “development”, and their abysmal record on rural distress. Voters have given them another chance but with less mandate. They had better pull their socks up. The mandate is also for the Sena to reorient and repurpose itself. Its candidates have done well, as expected, in Marathi dominated areas especially in cities but the BJP has pulled ahead with a mix on non-Marathi voters. There is a sense in the Sena, not entirely misplaced, that the BJP’s ambitious expansion of footprint will comes at Sena’s cost. The Sena’s vote share in the state dropped by about three per cent, its presence in key cities is now diminished, for the second time in a row it won fewer seats than the BJP in Mumbai. This coupled with the dismissive treatment it received from the Devendra Fadnavis government last five years has led to a trust deficit between them.

The Sena, then, sees an existential crisis. From here springs its many demands including having its chief minister for two-and-half years and/or key portfolios in the state cabinet. The BJP has been unwilling to yield. They both want to be in pole position for the all-important Mumbai civic election in early 2022. That the two can wilfully put their mandate and governance responsibilities secondary to their ambitions is, indeed, unfortunate for Maharashtra.

The Congress-NCP won 98 seats with the latter emerging stronger of the two. The Assembly looks set to have a NCP legislator as the all-important leader of opposition; a belligerent person can keep the government on its toes unlike in the previous term when opposition leader Radhakrishna Vikhe Patil gave the Devendra Fadnavis government a rather easy time. He and his son are now in the BJP. The mandate should also get Congress-NCP to rethink their approach to broad alliances – Prakash Ambedkar’s VBA cornered enough votes to deny them 25 seats, Asaduddin Owaisi’s AIMIM hurt their winning chances in nine seats. This split in the non-BJP-Sena vote was a crucial factor in the BJP-Sena bagging 161. Are these parties spoilers or serious political players? In this election, they were more the former.

For Mumbai, the outcome could not be worse. As many as 26 of the city’s 36 legislators were re-elected, four of the re-elected had scored the lowest in a recent survey by Praja, an independent think tank. Does this mean the city gave the mandate back to those who had not attended to its basic necessities and articulated its concerns? Yes, but also that the Congress, NCP and other parties need to take Mumbai seriously.