Trouble in UDF? Convenor Adoor Prakash flags ‘unilateral’ decisions by CM Satheesan

United Democratic Front (UDF) convener Adoor Prakash has publicly voiced his displeasure over what he described as a growing lack of collective decision-making within Kerala’s ruling coalition, putting Chief Minister and UDF chairman V.D. Satheesan in an uncomfortable spot.

Prakash said several important decisions were being taken without discussions within the UDF and that he was often learning about them through the media. He specifically cited the decision to grant cabinet-rank status to IUML leader M.K. Muneer and Forward Bloc leader G. Devarajan, saying he had neither been consulted nor informed that the appointments were being considered.

“Both of them are deserving people. I am not saying this to criticise them,” Prakash said. His objection, he made clear, was to the process rather than the individuals. Such decisions, he said, should have been discussed within the UDF.

“I will convey my displeasure to the AICC leadership,” he said.

Prakash said the absence of such meetings had effectively left him unable to perform his role. He said the UDF was not holding meetings and noted that the initiative to convene UDF leadership meetings rested primarily with the chairman (CM Satheesan). As no direction or call had been issued, he said, meetings of the front had stalled.

The UDF coordination committee has met only once since the Assembly elections, in July.

According to Prakash, a number of issues require collective deliberation, but the UDF currently lacks the forum to discuss them. This has also created a communication problem for the coalition leadership. When journalists and party workers from across the state approach him seeking explanations for decisions, he said, he often has no answers because he himself has not been briefed.

“I am saying this now because I feel there is no point in keeping these issues under wraps any longer,” Prakash said.

He repeatedly sought to distinguish his criticism from a personal attack on Satheesan. “Do not misunderstand this as an attempt to blame the Chief Minister. I am saying these things based on my experience,” he said.

But the substance of his criticism directly concerns the Chief Minister's functioning as UDF chairman. Prakash pointed out that the initiative for convening meetings rests with the chairman and that, without his direction, the convener cannot simply call a formal meeting of the front.

The disconnect, he suggested, extends beyond appointments. Prakash said that even during the recent by-election campaign, he had travelled to several districts on his own initiative despite receiving no specific instructions from the leadership. He attributed the UDF's setback partly to inadequate coordination.

He also referred to dissatisfaction among coalition workers over infighting and a physical clash in Chirayinkeezhu involving a female Congress MLA, as well as the government’s handling of the power crisis in the state. These, he said, were issues that required political coordination and a collective response from the coalition.

Another source of discontent is the delay in replacing people appointed by the previous LDF government to boards and corporations. Prakash said UDF workers were unhappy that months after the change of government, people appointed during the previous regime continued to occupy such positions.

“I share the dissatisfaction of our workers over this. Steps should be taken at the earliest to appoint people from the UDF to these positions,” he said.

Prakash also touched upon the controversy over Satheesan's chartered flight travel, saying the Chief Minister should explain the matter in a manner that satisfies the public.

Interestingly, Prakash reiterated that he is not lobbying for particular individuals or positions. His argument, he said, was about process, merit, and coalition consensus.

The unusually candid remarks come at a time when the UDF is attempting to consolidate its political and organisational machinery after assuming power. Prakash’s public criticism has now put the question of internal coordination between the government, the Congress, and the UDF squarely on the political agenda.