top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Shinde dilutes demand

Likely to be content with Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai Mumbai: In a decisive shift that redraws the power dynamics of Maharashtra’s urban politics, the standoff over the prestigious Mumbai Mayor’s post has ended with a strategic compromise. Following days of resort politics and intense backroom negotiations, the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena has reportedly diluted its demand for the top job in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), settling instead for the Deputy Mayor’s post. This...

Shinde dilutes demand

Likely to be content with Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai Mumbai: In a decisive shift that redraws the power dynamics of Maharashtra’s urban politics, the standoff over the prestigious Mumbai Mayor’s post has ended with a strategic compromise. Following days of resort politics and intense backroom negotiations, the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena has reportedly diluted its demand for the top job in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), settling instead for the Deputy Mayor’s post. This development, confirmed by high-ranking party insiders, follows the realization that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) effectively ceded its claims on the Kalyan-Dombivali Municipal Corporation (KDMC) to protect the alliance, facilitating a “Mumbai for BJP, Kalyan for Shinde” power-sharing formula. The compromise marks a complete role reversal between the BJP and the Shiv Sena. Both the political parties were in alliance with each other for over 25 years before 2017 civic polls. Back then the BJP used to get the post of Deputy Mayor while the Shiv Sena always enjoyed the mayor’s position. In 2017 a surging BJP (82 seats) had paused its aggression to support the undivided Shiv Sena (84 seats), preferring to be out of power in the Corporation to keep the saffron alliance intact. Today, the numbers dictate a different reality. In the recently concluded elections BJP emerged as the single largest party in Mumbai with 89 seats, while the Shinde faction secured 29. Although the Shinde faction acted as the “kingmaker”—pushing the alliance past the majority mark of 114—the sheer numerical gap made their claim to the mayor’s post untenable in the long run. KDMC Factor The catalyst for this truce lies 40 kilometers north of Mumbai in Kalyan-Dombivali, a region considered the impregnable fortress of Eknath Shinde and his son, MP Shrikant Shinde. While the BJP performed exceptionally well in KDMC, winning 50 seats compared to the Shinde faction’s 53, the lotter for the reservation of mayor’s post in KDMC turned the tables decisively in favor of Shiv Sena there. In the lottery, the KDMC mayor’ post went to be reserved for the Scheduled Tribe candidate. The BJP doesn’t have any such candidate among elected corporatros in KDMC. This cleared the way for Shiv Sena. Also, the Shiv Sena tied hands with the MNS in the corporation effectively weakening the Shiv Sena (UBT)’s alliance with them. Party insiders suggest that once it became clear the BJP would not pursue the KDMC Mayor’s chair—effectively acknowledging it as Shinde’s fiefdom—he agreed to scale down his demands in the capital. “We have practically no hope of installing a BJP Mayor in Kalyan-Dombivali without shattering the alliance locally,” a Mumbai BJP secretary admitted and added, “Letting the KDMC become Shinde’s home turf is the price for securing the Mumbai Mayor’s bungalow for a BJP corporator for the first time in history.” The formal elections for the Mayoral posts are scheduled for later this month. While the opposition Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA)—led by the Shiv Sena (UBT)—has vowed to field candidates, the arithmetic heavily favors the ruling alliance. For Eknath Shinde, accepting the Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai is a tactical retreat. It allows him to consolidate his power in the MMR belt (Thane and Kalyan) while remaining a partner in Mumbai’s governance. For the BJP, this is a crowning moment; after playing second fiddle in the BMC for decades, they are poised to finally install their own “First Citizen” of Mumbai.

Urban Threats

Maharashtra is no stranger to the twin forces of dissent and disruption. From the caste-fuelled Bhima-Koregaon riots in 2018 to the ideological battlefields of the 2015 FTII protests, the state’s urban centres have often served as flashpoints for unrest. Now, the Maharashtra government led by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has introduced the Maharashtra Special Public Security Act (MSPSC), 2024 to counter the insidious threat of ‘Urban Naxalism’ creeping into cities through covert ‘front organisations.’ Predictably, the bill that has sparked both support and sharp criticism. While the legislation purports to strengthen the state’s response to urban threats, its detractors claim that such sweeping powers risk tipping the scales away from liberty and towards authoritarianism.


The government’s case for the bill is grounded in pressing realities. The Bhima-Koregaon riots of 2018 exposed how incendiary rhetoric and ideological proxies could fan the flames of caste conflict. Similarly, the FTII protests underscored the extent to which urban centres have become battlegrounds for ideological warfare. According to the state, Naxal-affiliated ‘front organisations’ allegedly provide logistical support and ideological cover to armed cadres, enabling them to infiltrate urban spaces. Existing laws, such as the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), have proven slow and cumbersome in addressing this threat.


The MSPSC aims to fill this gap. Its provisions empower the government to declare organisations unlawful and prosecute individuals engaging in activities deemed dangerous to public order. Penalties range from two to seven years’ imprisonment, with fines reaching Rs.5 lakh. Unlike the UAPA, the new law allows local authorities, district magistrates or police commissioners, to grant prosecutorial sanctions, cutting through bureaucratic red tape.


By empowering district magistrates and police commissioners to grant prosecution sanctions, the legislation promises swifter action against unlawful activities. Moreover, it targets not just armed insurgents but also their urban logistical networks, potentially disrupting a critical support system for Naxal operations. The act’s provisions, modelled after similar laws in states like Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh, reflect a coordinated effort to tackle a national menace. If implemented judiciously, the law could enhance public safety.


Yet Maharashtra is not rural Bastar. Its urban fabric is more complex, its population more diverse, and its civil society more vocal. Heavy-handed policing in the name of public security could alienate communities and stoke the very unrest the law seeks to quell. The state’s social fabric is increasingly strained by rapid urbanisation, economic disparities and political polarisation. Detractors of the bill say that addressing these issues will require dialogue, inclusivity and reforms that strengthen governance rather than draconian laws. Whatever the case, when the MSPSC returns to the Assembly following deliberation on the bill, legislators must ensure that it strikes a firm balance between liberty and security. Maharashtra must uphold its proud tradition of democratic debate, yet it cannot allow itself to become a haven for unchecked extremism or the misuse of democratic liberties.

Comments

bottom of page