Is Congress' move to appoint observers a futile one?

New Delhi: The decision by the Congress to appoint observers to select district heads in states appears to be a futile exercise.

The 'Sangathan Srijan Abhiyan' (organisation rejuvenation campaign) was launched in April this year from Gujarat to rebuild the party and empower the district units. After Gujarat, a separate set of central and state observers have also been announced in Madhya Pradesh and Haryana.

While the process has been completed in Gujarat, it is going on in Madhya Pradesh and Haryana.

There are several reasons to justify the assumption that the move was an exercise in futility.

Firstly, it does not restrict the influence of senior leaders of the state to appoint their chosen ones on the posts. This is in direct conflict with former party chief Rahul Gandhi's position that those with no political lineage or patronage should be encouraged to take up the leadership role in the organisation.

As seen in Gujarat, the senior leaders continue to wield significant clout in organisational decisions.

Several observers received calls from senior leaders to ensure their loyalists are appointed to the posts.

So, there doesn’t seem to be any change in the existing system in which senior leaders would get their chosen ones appointed to key posts in the party. The same procedure continues to be followed.

In Madhya Pradesh, where the process is at its initial stage, leaders such as Kamal Nath, Digvijaya Singh, Arun Yadav and others are said to have already forwarded their names to the observers.

The same is expected in Haryana, where the observers are unlikely to ignore the suggestions of senior leaders such as Bhupinder Singh Hooda, Kumari Selja, Randeep Singh Surjewala and others.

A glimpse of it could be seen in the appointment of state observers. The list is dominated by those owing allegiance to Hooda, Selja and Surjewala, with the former Haryana chief minister taking the lead in getting a majority of the births.

Secondly, the move has largely undermined the position of the Pradesh Congress Committee (PCC) chiefs and All India Congress Committee (AICC) general secretaries and in-charges. The district leaders no longer consider them of any significance and directly approach the observers. As per the old system, the PCC chief and the AICC in-charge played a key role in the appointment of district presidents, though they too kept in mind the likes and dislikes of senior leaders.

Thus, the district heads always worked in close coordination with state heads and in-charges, and would diligently follow the directions.

The new process is likely to impact that working relationship since the district chiefs will now be appointed directly by the observers and not the PCC presidents and in-charges.

Many Congress leaders apprehend that the so-called democratisation process in the parent organisation might end up as a failure, as happened in its youth wing.