Cross-voting allegations trigger blame game within LDF in Kottayam

Allegations of cross-voting within the Left Democratic Front (LDF), first raised by the Kerala Congress (M) [KC(M)], appears to have now escalated into an open and increasingly bitter blame game in Kottayam.

Finding itself under mounting pressure within the alliance, the KC(M) has shifted into firefighting mode in an attempt to contain the controversy. The issue pertains to a post-election steering committee meeting of the party, where the leadership alleged that cross-voting by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] cadres contributed to the defeat of its candidates.

However, both the CPI(M) and the Communist Party of India (CPI) have moved to counter the charge in their respective post-poll review meetings, arguing instead that their own candidates did not receive the expected support from the KC(M) voters. The CPI(M) district committee meeting in Kottayam went a step further, alleging that the KC(M) cadres cross-voted in Ettumanur and Puthuppally, where the CPI(M) candidates were in the fray. According to the assessment within the Left party, only senior KC(M) leaders extended support to the CPI(M) candidates, while a section of grassroots workers allegedly drifted towards the United Democratic Front (UDF).

Reciprocal support

The CPI too raised similar concerns, stating that its candidate in Vaikom did not receive the anticipated support from the KC(M). Ironically, several KC(M) candidates in central Travancore lost by narrow margins, a factor now being cited by some within the alliance as possible evidence of reciprocal support from the CPI(M) cadres.

Amid the escalating friction, the KC(M) leadership has attempted to scale down the row, insisting that its observations on cross-voting by the CPI(M) cadres were 'misunderstood.’ KC(M) district president Lopez Mathew said the remarks were not confined to seats contested by the KC(M) alone or Kottayam district alone, but were based on a wider assessment across Kerala, particularly in the CPI(M) strongholds such as Kannur, Kasaragod, and Alappuzha.

He also pointed to defeats in Thrikkarippur, Uduma, Taliparamba, Payyannur, Alappuzha, Ambalappuzha, and Udumbanchola as cases that warrant serious scrutiny. Mr. Mathew also said the KC(M) district committee would take up a detailed review of the LDF’s complete rout in Kottayam district at its meeting scheduled for May 28.

“In the preliminary assessment, it has been found that there was no cross-voting by the CPI(M) workers in the constituencies in Kottayam district where the KC(M) candidates contested. However, a deeper evaluation is required in constituencies within the district such as Puthuppally, Kottayam, Ettumanur, and Vaikom, where the CPI(M) and the CPI were in the fray. The margins of victory of the Congress candidates in Puthuppally and Kottayam, in particular, should be taken up for detailed study,” he said.

Internal criticism

Meanwhile, district-level review meetings of the CPI(M) and CPI also witnessed sharp internal criticism of their respective leaderships, with concerns raised over the parties’ growing disconnect within the electorate. The CPI(M) district secretariat, however, has sought to counter the media reports on the internal discussions, asserting that the party’s organisational practice is rooted in collective self-criticism.

In a statement, it said the party does not attribute failure to any one or two leaders, but treats setbacks as a collective organisational responsibility requiring corrective action.