The recent defection of a large number of former Ministers and legislators belonging to the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) to the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) has prompted many to wonder whether the ruling party is seeking to build its organisational network through these latest recruits.

Even though it is well known that the Vijay Makkal Iyakkam (VMI), a voluntary organisation made up of newly elected Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay’s fans, has provided the much-needed manpower for the TVK, there is a perception in certain quarters that the ruling party has not yet acquired enough strength on the ground. Under such circumstances, it is quite natural that the TVK follows an “open-door policy” for anyone with political experience, especially from the AIADMK, which has finished third in the April-May Assembly election. There have been accretions to the ruling party from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) too but the TVK’s keenness to woo as many cadres as it can from the AIADMK is clearly evident. At an event to mark the admission of the defectors last week, one of the prominent faces of the new regime and Minister for Public Works and Sports Development Aadhav Arjuna said that “the AIADMK and the TVK are one and the same. The TVK is not a different party but [like] a parent body.” This observation has prompted leaders and observers to describe the TVK as “a new AIADMK.”

Editorial | Betrayal of mandate: On the TVK and Tamil Nadu politics

The main reason why the ruling party is targeting the Dravidian major is the latter’s comparative weakness in relation to its traditional adversary, the DMK. The depth of its defeat can be appreciated better if one is to take a close look at how it suffered electoral reverses in the 2026 Assembly poll. Apart from winning only 47 Assembly seats (against 66 seats in 2021), the party forfeited deposit in 19 seats, the highest so far. But the DMK, which contested four seats more than the AIADMK’s 172, did not forfeit deposit in any constituency. In terms of vote share in contested seats, the DMK fared better with 32.17% as against the other’s 28.7%.

A new alternative

There is one school of thought within the AIADMK, as articulated by general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami late last week, that the party’s performance was not as poor as it was in 1996 when it secured only four seats and that of the DMK’s in 1991 when it won just two seats. But there is one qualitative difference between 2026 and 1991 and 1996 — there was no credible third alternative force available then, unlike the TVK now. Besides, the number of seats where both the Dravidian majors forfeited deposits was much lower — 3 for the DMK in 1991 and 2 for the AIADMK in 1996. Moreover, as regards the AIADMK, the signals were out even in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls when the party forfeited, for the first time in a parliamentary election, deposits in seven constituencies. It is against this backdrop that the TVK, which has catapulted to power in the recent polls, is consolidating its position.

There are a few more compelling factors for the ruling party to take under its fold members of the AIADMK. In the Assembly polls, the TVK drew a blank in eight districts including Villupuram (with seven Assembly constituencies) and Nagapattinam-Mayiladuthurai-Tiruvarur (put together, 10 seats). It knows that it has to have a strong base in all these areas, even though no leading figure from these places was there in the latest round of defectors.

In addition, local body polls are going to be held in eight months, as declared by Mr. Arjuna a couple of days ago. Rural local bodies in 28 districts, which comprise 9,581 village panchayats, 314 panchayat union councils, and 28 district panchayats, do not have elected representatives. The term of such bodies in nine other districts will be over in four months. In February next year, the term of all major urban local bodies will also end. Going by all indications, the authorities would like to have elections to the rural and urban local bodies together. This is why the Minister has challenged the DMK asking whether it would be able to bag mayorship even in one municipal corporation.

Is Tamil Nadu witnessing its own ‘Operation Lotus’? | Focus Tamil Nadu

Politics in Tamil Nadu has entered a disturbing and controversial phase after four All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MLAs resigned and joined the ruling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam led by Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay. Critics have likened the development to the BJP’s much-criticised “Operation Lotus” strategy seen in several States. Is this simply the reality of coalition-era politics, or does it amount to a betrayal of TVK’s promise of clean and ethical governance?
| Video Credit:
The Hindu

It may be the hope of the TVK that if the party were to come out with flying colours in the local body polls, it can make moves, both politically and administratively, much more confidently than it has done so far.

All is not well in the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam after the recent election drubbing in Tamil Nadu, with the newly elected legislators sharply divided on electing their Legislature Party leader. While one group supports party general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami, a larger group is throwing its weight behind former Minister S.P. Velumani.

On Monday, after the swearing-in of all the legislators was over, a letter, purportedly signed by a group of legislators of the AIADMK stating that Mr. Palaniswami had been elected the Leader of the Legislature Party, was submitted to the Pro-tem Speaker M.V. Karuppaiah at his chamber. As per media reports, the general secretary got the backing of 17 of the 47 MLAs belonging to the AIADMK, though a member of the Palaniswami camp claimed it was 24. Former Handlooms Minister O.S. Manian, who handed over the letter to the Pro-tem Speaker, told The Hindu that he was not aware of the contents of the letter. “I did what I was asked to do,” he observed.

However, around 6 p.m., former Law Minister C.Ve. Shanmugam, accompanied by Mr. Velumani and many other former Ministers, including Natham R. Viswanathan and R. Kamaraj, came to the office of the Pro-tem Speaker and presented a letter claiming the support of 30 MLAs for the leadership of Mr. Velumani.

Earlier in the day, Mr. Palaniswami denied reports that the party was heading towards a split.

The churning in the AIADMK was also evident in the Assembly, going by the reception provided by the party legislators to Mr. Palaniswami and Mr. Velumani. Unlike on previous occasions in the last five years when Mr. Palaniswami was accompanied by a large contingent of his colleagues while entering the Assembly premises, only a handful of MLAs escorted him this time. Mr. Velumani, who served as the Local Administration Minister in the Palaniswami Cabinet and seen invariably with the former in the past, came later to the Assembly premises along with former Health Minister C. Vijayabaskar.

Likewise, when the turn came for the former Chief Minister and Mr. Velumani to be sworn in as MLAs, the reception given to them by their colleagues, in the form of thumping of desks, was similar. The message was clear: the challenge to Mr. Palaniswami’s leadership was quite open.

In the past four days, the residence of Mr. Shanmugam on Karpagam Avenue, near Foreshore Estate, had become the centre of activity in the AIADMK, with a large number of MLAs and other office-bearers attending discussions on their future course of action. Mr. Shanmugam, who did not attend the oath-taking event in the morning, went to the Assembly around 3.15 p.m. and was sworn in as an MLA. The rebel MLAs also had a meeting at a guesthouse near Mr. Shanmugam’s house.

About two years ago, when the party had suffered a drubbing in the Lok Sabha election, a delegation of six leaders, including Mr. Shanmugam, Mr. Velumani and Mr. Viswanathan, had sought to impress upon Mr. Palaniswami that there should be reconciliation with former party leaders such as V.K. Sasikala.