AKBAR GADED
Elections are often cel ebrated as the corner stone of representative democracy, giving citizens the power to decide who governs and in what direction socie ty should move. Yet behind every vote lies a fundamental question. What determines a voter’s electoral choice? Is it loyalty to a political party, agreement with its ideology and policies, or is the deci sion increasingly driven by a particular individual contest ing the election? As electoral politics becomes more per sonalised and localised, un derstanding the basis of elec toral choice has become more important than ever. Recent State and local elec tions suggest that voters are increasingly influenced by individual candidates rather than political parties alone. Candidates who are accessi ble, responsive to local con cerns, and capable of deliver ing development often build a personal support base that cuts across traditional party loyalties. In many constituencies, voters appear to justify their choice less by referring to a party’s ideology or manifes to and more by a candidate’s ability to “get work done.” This reflects a gradual shift from party-centred politics towards candidate-centred politics. Political parties have recognised both the opportu nities and risks of this trans formation.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
While popular leaders can attract votes and strengthen a party’s elector al prospects, they can also emerge as independent cen tres of political influence, potentially overshadowing the organisation itself. Conse quently, parties increasingly seek to institutionalise lead ership through tighter con trol over candidate selection, organisational appointments, and leadership succession. Several political develop ments across India illustrate this dynamic. In Karnataka, B S Yedi yurappa’s personal popular ity played a crucial role in expanding his party’s elec toral base. In Odisha, Naveen Patnaik’s personal credibility became one of the principal reasons for his party’s long electoral success. Similar ly, in West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee’s personal leader ship has remained central to her party’s electoral appeal.
These examples demonstrate the growing importance of individual leaders in elector al politics while highlighting political parties’ continuing efforts to preserve organisa tional cohesion and authority. But why has this shift towards candidate-centred voting oc curred? One important ex planation lies in how citizens experience the state in their everyday lives. When access to public ser vices is marked by adminis trative hurdles and delays, citizens increasingly value representatives who can help them navigate the system. The candidate, therefore, becomes not merely a political repre sentative but also an inter mediary between citizens and the state. In an ideal demo cratic system, the relationship is relatively straightforward. Citizens elect their repre sentatives, government for mulate policies, and bureau cratic institutions implement them. Citizens, in turn, receive the public services to which they are legally entitled, in cluding basic amenities like housing, roads, drinking wa ter, healthcare, education, se curity, etc. These services are neither gifts nor acts of generosity by political representatives, but they are constitutional and administrative obligations of the state.
But why has this shift towards candidate-cen tred voting occurred? One important explanation lies in how citizens experience the state in their everyday lives. When access to public services is marked by admin istrative hurdles and delays, citizens increasingly value representatives who can help them navigate the bureaucra cy. Beyond making laws and shaping public policy, elect ed representatives now fre quently follow up on files, coordinate with government officials, facilitate welfare ap plications, and resolve routine administrative problems. In some cases, they are also ex pected to use their personal influence to secure favoura ble administrative outcomes in cases involving procedural complexities or administra tive discretion. Consequent ly, in many constituencies, representatives’ offices have evolved into facilitation cen tres where citizens seek as sistance in accessing basic public services. The growing popularity of weekly public forums and citizen outreach initiatives reflects this ex panding role. This evolving role has reshaped public ex pectations. Representatives are increasingly judged not by their legislative perfor mance or policy expertise but by their accessibility, re sponsiveness, and ability to resolve everyday problems.
As a result, public services are often credited to the repre sentative who facilitated them rather than to the institutions legally responsible for deliv ering them. Electoral support, therefore, becomes rooted in personal experience and trust rather than in party ideology or policy programmes. This perspective also helps explain several contemporary elector al trends. Party defections, for instance, are often less dam aging than conventional the ories of voting would predict. Candidates frequently switch to parties with con trasting ideological positions yet continue to retain electoral support because voters asso ciate them with accessibility and effective problem-solving rather than with a particular party. The same dynamic has also fuelled personalised pol itics. Candidates invest heav ily in maintaining a visible presence through community engagement, local initiatives, emergency assistance, and continuous interaction with voters. Amplified by social media, these efforts strengthen their personal image, making visi bility and accessibility almost as important as ideology and policy in electoral competi tion. Ironically, this transfor mation exposes a deeper in stitutional paradox.
When public institutions fail to deliver services efficiently, elected representatives in creasingly become informal facilitators of routine admin istrative work. Strengthening democratic accountability, therefore, requires efficient, transparent, and citizen-ori ented institutions that deliver public services as legal enti tlements rather than through political mediation, allowing representatives to focus on their constitutional responsi bilities of legislation and pub lic policy. The role of an elected repre sentative is to strengthen pub lic institutions, not to substi tute for them. Ultimately, the real challenge is not whether citizens vote for a party or a candidate, but whether dem ocratic institutions are strong enough to ensure that citizens need not rely on political in termediaries to access the services to which they are en titled. (The author is Faculty of Political Science at Govern ment College of Arts, Science & Commerce, Khandola)
