Those who root for genuine democracy draw inspiration from Rahul Gandhi's successful experiments in Youth Congress and student wing. Instead of appointments, Rahul got a set of procedures drawn up by election expert K.J. Rao. This, we are told, has unleashed new talents and energy among the youth activists. A data bank of talent has been created as reservoir for the parent party. Rahul's name adds a new aura to the idea. So much so, even seasoned leaders like Digvijay Singh take all care not to reject the 'Rahul model' though every veteran will vouch for its utter impracticability in a party like the Congress.

Protagonists of the 'Rahul model' argue that as in the youth wing, free election at all levels will herald vibrant democracy and unleash new forces that can revitalise the Congress Party. It was the appointment culture that had killed initiative and prevented the natural rise of energetic leaders with mass support. Those who are dropped down from the top as presidents and secretaries merely draw on the party's existing support base and goodwill while leaders elected on the basis of their real hold on the masses will bring new sections into the party. Like the liberalised economy, the Rajiv model will unshackle new forces and boost the Congress stature to new heights.

When party ranks actively participate in internal elections, the argument goes, competition will bring out the best. It will activate the ranks and create new enthusiasm. They reel out the names of the present PCC chiefs and central office-bearers and ask how many of them can win election on their own. Many have not won any election. They all got appointed through their clout in Delhi. They tend to be accountable only to the Delhi bosses or their contacts, not the people on the ground. On paper, all this sounds highly romantic and appealing to the uninitiated.

Let us be frank. Internal democracy is incompatible with the kind of party structure being perpetuated by contemporary India's political class. The only exceptions are the two communist parties which prepare their documents, place them at the lowest to highest bodies and choose the office-bearers through ballots. Bharatiya Jana Sangh, also a cadre-based party, could do so. But not the 'Congressised' BJP. In Congress, every president - Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Rao - had nursed albeit briefly romantic ideas about democratisation. They all had vowed to enforce free elections but finally ended up in the good old appointment system.

The inverted pyramid power structure of the Indian political parties and their dynastic succession system are essentially antithesis to internal democracy. Every political party in India is led by a super boss on whose personal aura it sustains. It began with the Congress. Now the party supremo's kith and kin rule such outfits (of course, not the ones led by bachelor bosses). In outfits like Samajwadi Party and DMK with large extended families, decisions are taken within the political household. The family members do micromanagement of even district affairs and seek 'quota' for them in the lists of candidates and office-bearers. This relatively new trend kills the scope for whatever competition and initiative at the middle and lower levels.

The super boss system itself sustains on a minimum popular support base, augmented by an effective patron-client arrangement. Practice of power peddling and winnability criterion for selection of the nominees forecloses any scope for free internal elections. Thus the real competition will be limited to a few power brokers and manipulators. In this regard, the Congress might be better placed than parties like SP and BSP.

In the event of really free polls, the Congress will encounter problems at four levels. First, at the primary level where every election begins with innumerable complaints of bogus membership. Even DCC leaders encourage it for better leverage for their factions. Such bitter rivalry, opponents of the free polls argue, will intensify and stratify grassroots level factionalism. Instead of bringing out the best and revitalising, it will end up in the worst kind of manipulation and money power.

Second, under free elections, manipulator and moneybags will capture DCCs and PCCs, pushing back the honest and time-tested leaders. Third, the high command does have a vested interest in preventing the rise of those with own strength and support base. Such self-made leaders will be less pliable and go beyond the high command's brief. Then there is the possibility of the exclusion of high command's preferred choices in the elected bodies. The worst case had happened under Rao. When many of his favourites lost in the elections, an angry Rao at the Tirupathi session disbanded CWC and appointed a new one.

There have been cases where the formally elected office-bearers were replaced within months by the high command. The power of appointment has always been a mighty weapon for Delhi coterie. Fourth, regular free elections can produce mass leaders with proven support base. Prompt elimination of powerful challengers - Jaganmohan's antics after his father's death is the latest case - as and when they arise has been the essence of post-Syndicate Congress management. Pawar, Sangma and Mamata are living specimens. Then, there is always a conflict between the benefit accruing from a popular party leaders' own vote base and their political challenge to the high command. Apparently, political novices pushing the 'Rahul model' are unaware of such bitter truth.

Experienced Congress leaders say 'guided' election still remains the best option. Under this, central observers go to the spot, consult and produce a balanced 'consensus' list and call it unanimous election. The BJP also does so. It works well in a situation where every aspirant has to look to Delhi for 'ticket, note and vote'. The free election controversy also has a rather queer twist. Of late, power seekers show diminishing interest in the organisational elections because, for them, panchayat, assembly and Lok Sabha tickets are a more prized catch than a DCC post. After all, election tickets are decided at Delhi, not in DCCs and PCCs. (IPA Service)