DMK says its govt. fulfilled 80% of poll promises

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government in Tamil Nadu recently announced that it has fulfilled 80% of its 505 poll promises, having implemented 364 and with an additional 40 currently under consideration. This claim, made through a press release, offers a crucial insight into the dynamics of Indian state politics, governance accountability, and the evolving role of electoral manifestos.

**Background Context: The Promise of Power**

The DMK, led by M.K. Stalin, swept to power in the 2021 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, ending a decade of AIADMK rule. The election campaign was characterized by a highly detailed and extensive manifesto, which included a wide array of promises ranging from financial assistance to women heads of families (Rs. 1,000 per month) and reduction in petrol/diesel prices to agricultural loan waivers and employment generation. These promises were instrumental in shaping public perception and garnering voter support. In the highly competitive and ideologically charged political landscape of Tamil Nadu, manifestos are often seen not just as policy documents but as a social contract between the party and the electorate. The DMK's victory, securing 133 seats out of 234, underscored the public's expectation of these commitments being honored.

**The DMK's Claim: A Performance Report**

The government's announcement that 364 out of 505 promises have been implemented, with 40 more under active consideration, translates to a significant claim of performance. This implies a systematic tracking and execution mechanism within the government. Such a public declaration serves multiple purposes: it aims to bolster public confidence, counter opposition criticism, and set a narrative of effective governance. For instance, key promises like the Rs. 1,000 monthly assistance for women (Kalaignar Magalir Urimai Thogai Thittam) and free bus travel for women have been widely implemented, directly impacting a large segment of the population. These specific schemes resonate deeply with the welfare-oriented political tradition of Tamil Nadu.

**Key Stakeholders and Their Roles**

Several key stakeholders are involved in this narrative. The **DMK government** itself is the primary actor, responsible for both making and fulfilling these promises, and then publicly accounting for them. **Opposition parties**, such as the AIADMK and BJP, play a critical role as scrutinizers, challenging the veracity of these claims and holding the government accountable. **Citizens and voters** are the ultimate beneficiaries and evaluators; their perception of promise fulfillment directly impacts future electoral outcomes. The **Election Commission of India (ECI)**, while not directly involved in post-election performance reviews, has historically emphasized the need for political parties to be transparent about the financial viability of their poll promises, as seen in cases like *S. Subramaniam Balaji v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2013)*, where the Supreme Court urged the ECI to frame guidelines regarding manifestos and 'freebies.' Finally, the **media and civil society organizations** act as independent fact-checkers, analyzing government data and public feedback to verify claims.

**Significance for Indian Democracy and Governance**

This development holds profound significance for Indian democracy. Firstly, it highlights the growing emphasis on **accountability and transparency** in governance. In an era of increasing citizen awareness, governments are under pressure to demonstrate tangible results. Secondly, it underscores the importance of **electoral integrity**; manifestos are increasingly viewed as binding documents rather than mere rhetoric. The fulfillment of promises, especially those related to social welfare, aligns with the **Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP)** enshrined in Part IV of the Indian Constitution, particularly Articles 38 (to secure a social order for the promotion of welfare of the people), 39 (certain principles of policy to be followed by the State), 41 (right to work, to education and to public assistance in certain cases), and 46 (promotion of educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections). Many of the DMK's welfare schemes directly address these principles. This also impacts **fiscal federalism**, as state governments must balance ambitious welfare programs with their financial capabilities, often relying on central grants or state-specific revenue generation.

**Historical and Constitutional Context**

The tradition of elaborate poll manifestos and welfare promises has a long history in Tamil Nadu, dating back to the Dravidian movement's emphasis on social justice and equality. Historically, parties like the DMK and AIADMK have consistently used manifestos as a key campaigning tool, often leading to competitive 'freebie' politics. Constitutionally, while there is no direct legal enforceability of manifesto promises, the spirit of democratic governance demands a commitment to them. The **Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005**, empowers citizens to seek information on the implementation status of government schemes, acting as a crucial tool for accountability. The ECI's Model Code of Conduct, though primarily for the pre-election period, influences how promises are made, urging parties to avoid promises that vitiate the purity of the election process.

**Future Implications**

Such performance claims have significant future implications. They can set a precedent for other state governments to regularly report on their manifesto fulfillment, potentially leading to a more performance-oriented political culture. It also intensifies the debate around the efficacy and financial sustainability of welfare schemes, especially 'freebies,' which continue to be a contentious issue in Indian politics. The public's response to these claims will undoubtedly influence the DMK's prospects in upcoming local and general elections. Furthermore, it might encourage greater detail and financial prudence in future manifestos, as parties will know their promises are subject to rigorous post-election scrutiny. This move by the DMK could usher in an era where electoral manifestos are taken more seriously by both political parties and the electorate, fostering a healthier democratic dialogue centered on tangible development and welfare.