Uttar Pradesh: Factional feud stalls appointment of BJP presidents in 28 districts

The BJP has divided Uttar Pradesh into 98 organisational districts.

The Uttar Pradesh unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Sunday announced the names of district presidents in 70 districts, while elections in 28 districts were postponed due to internal opposition, factionalism, and pressure from senior party leaders.

The BJP has divided Uttar Pradesh into 98 organisational districts. The election process began in the first week of January, but due to internal opposition and pressure, state election in-charge Mahendra Nath Pandey, state president Bhupendra Singh Chaudhary, and general secretary organisation Dharampal Singh could not declare the district presidents in all districts simultaneously.

“This situation is unprecedented for the BJP, where the state and national leadership failed to reach a consensus on district president appointments,” said a senior journalist and political analyst Manoj Bhadra.

Significantly, among the districts where elections were deferred are Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s parliamentary constituency Varanasi, state election in-charge Mahendra Nath Pandey’s constituency Chandauli, and Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya’s home district Kaushambi. The lack of consensus among leaders has exposed underlying factional strife within the party.

Of the 70 appointed district presidents, 44 are fresh faces, while 26 were given a second term. At least 29 of them belong to dalit and backward castes. However, what stands out is that despite the leadership’s efforts, state and national leaders failed to reach an agreement on the appointments, leading to significant delays.

BJP’s national leadership had entrusted former state president Mahendra Nath Pandey with overseeing the organisational elections in UP, given his past experience in appointing divisional and district presidents. Despite more than two months of delay, over 200 divisional president positions remain vacant, further complicating the electoral process.

Factional clashes stall appointments

Political analysts suggest that local power struggles between MLAs, MPs, ministers, and organisational leaders prevented the appointments in several districts. Even Pandey himself was unable to ensure the appointment of a district president in his own Chandauli constituency, raising concerns about the leadership’s ability to maintain party unity at the grassroots level.

In Ayodhya, former MP Lallu Singh pushed to install his close aide as district president, while the party leadership favored a committed cadre worker. Singh also sought the removal of the current district president, Kamlesh Srivastava, leading to an impasse.

Similarly, in Lakhimpur Kheri, former Union Minister Ajay Mishra Teni and local MLAs failed to agree on a candidate. Meanwhile, in Barabanki, dissatisfaction over the performance of current district president Arvind Maurya led to demands for new leadership after BJP’s defeat in the Lok Sabha elections.

In Ambedkar Nagar, grassroots workers have voiced anger against District President Trayambak Tiwari, but his connections with senior Delhi-based leaders have enabled him to stall the elections. In Gorakhpur’s Siddharthnagar, only five out of 25 Mandal Presidents have been appointed, creating further hurdles for the district president election.

In Deoria, a rift between MP Shashank Mani and local MLAs stalled the process, while former state president Ramapati Ram Tripathi sought to install his own candidate. Similar disputes have been reported in Jhansi over District President Hemant Parihar’s appointment.

Infighting delays elections in key districts

Several districts saw elections delayed due to factional battles:

Saharanpur: A power tussle between state minister Brajesh Singh and minister of state Jaswant Saini halted appointments.

Aligarh: Satish Gautam and MLAs Jaiveer Singh and Rajveer Singh Raju Bhaiya failed to reach a consensus.

Meerut: Political rivalry between former minister Sanjeev Baliyan and Sangeet Som led to a deadlock.

Hapur: Disagreement between regional president Satendra Sisodia and MLAs obstructed elections.

Pilibhit: Union Minister Jitin Prasada and state minister Sanjay Gangwar could not agree on a candidate.

Jhansi, Jalaun, and Hamirpur: Delays arose from disputes over incumbent district presidents and caste-based electoral strategies.

Strategic damage control by BJP leadership

Sensing the potential for protests and internal rifts, state BJP president Bhupendra Singh Chaudhary and General Secretary (Organisation) Dharampal Singh adopted a calculated strategy to prevent open rebellion. Senior officials, ministers, MPs, and former ministers were deployed to oversee the selection processes, ensuring a controlled environment.

Live coverage of meetings in all districts was organised to ensure transparency and curb dissent. However, political experts argue that these internal rifts ahead of the upcoming elections indicate deeper fault lines within the party’s organisational structure.

R N Bajpayee, another political analyst, believes that with the 2024 elections approaching, influential leaders are keen on securing district president positions for their loyalists. “The power struggle we see today will play a decisive role in the party’s strategy for the upcoming elections,” he remarked.

As BJP continues its efforts to consolidate power in Uttar Pradesh, resolving these internal conflicts remains a crucial challenge for the party leadership.