Ahead of 2026 election, how can DMK retain credibility and control the narrative?

Indian Express

04-06-2025

The verdict in the Anna University sexual assault case — the Mahila Court sentenced 37-year-old biryani vendor Gnanasekaran to life imprisonment without remission for 30 years — marks a significant moment of judicial clarity. Examining forensic evidence, including mobile data that proved the accused had kept his phone on 'flight mode' for over two hours during the crime, the court dismissed speculation of multiple perpetrators. In fact, the judge found Gnanasekaran guilty under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Information Technology (IT) Act, and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act (1998) — a verdict arrived at without political interference or procedural delay.
However, legal closure rarely halts political rumour. Even as the public prosecutor warned that continued speculation could amount to contempt of court, the phrase 'Yaar Andha Sir?' ('Who is that sir?') has already entered political discourse, largely due to insinuations by AIADMK leaders and an opportunistic digital echo chamber. The truth, it seems, is not what is proved in court but what sticks in public memory. Ironically, the DMK government, often accused of political micro-management, allowed this case to move swiftly through an autonomous legal process. In a state where past sexual assault cases, like the Pollachi scandal, were delayed or allegedly mishandled, notably under the AIADMK's watch, this is not insignificant. Nevertheless, the opposition has deftly turned the DMK's early assertion that there was only one accused into a point of political attack, calling it 'prejudgement' and 'potential cover-up'.
This episode reveals the broader question facing the DMK as it heads toward the 2026 assembly elections: How does the party retain credibility and control the narrative?
The DMK's record over the last four years is, in many ways, better than its predecessors. Schemes centred around school-going children, women, and the youth have received appreciation. Other schemes like Illam Thedi Kalvi, Makkalai Thedi Maruthuvam, and grievance redressal initiatives have improved state–citizen interaction, especially in rural Tamil Nadu. The government's efforts in resisting NEET, symbolically potent even if legally ineffective, have bolstered its pro-social justice image. Investments in government schools, Primary Health Centres (PHCs), and digital governance platforms also signal policy intent that is not merely rhetorical.
However, the government's challenges are far from trivial. Tamil Nadu's graduate unemployment (16.78 per cent) remains uncomfortably high, and industrial job creation has failed to keep up with expectations. Chennai's chronic flooding and waste management failures have not seen systemic solutions, and the DMK's urban governance, while more responsive than before, lacks long-term vision. Add to this the unfolding TASMAC controversy, a potentially damaging scandal involving liquor procurement irregularities and alleged revenue manipulation. For many Tamil households, especially among the working poor, TASMAC is more than a public sector enterprise; it is a source of everyday distress. Women-led protests and growing anger around alcoholism have sharpened the moral critique of the government's alleged role in enabling addiction under the guise of revenue generation.
Besides, actor-turned-politician Vijay's debut through Tamizhaga Vetri Kazhagam seems to have disrupted the Dravidian binary in a way few thought possible. Unlike fringe players like Seeman's NTK, Vijay carries an immense fan base and strong recall across age groups. His youth appeal and calculated distance from Hindutva politics make him formidable. Vijay has carefully crafted his messaging: anti-corruption, pro-education and socially inclusive. By not aligning with either Dravidian major or the BJP, he is attempting to occupy the unclaimed centre, a space attractive to urban, educated, and politically ambivalent first-time voters. If TVK contests all 234 seats, it may not win many outright, but it could split votes in enough constituencies to damage both DMK and AIADMK prospects.
Meanwhile, the AIADMK is trying to regain lost ground under Edappadi K Palaniswami. While the party remains factionalised without a charismatic face, it still commands a sizeable rural base. Its attempts to link the Anna University case to a larger narrative of DMK complacency may not be grounded in evidence, but they are politically shrewd. In alliance with the BJP, the AIADMK hopes to capitalise on any anti-incumbency sentiment. However, this strategy remains fraught with risk: Tamil Nadu's electorate have consistently displayed a deep-rooted scepticism towards the BJP, viewing it as hostile to Tamil identity and interests, a perception that remains firmly embedded in the state's political consciousness.
What must the DMK do, then? First, it must address the TASMAC issue head-on through transparency, audits, action against corruption, and a clear plan to reduce reliance on alcohol revenue. Second, the party must move beyond legacy rhetoric toward forward-looking governance. Digital skills training, green jobs, women's safety, and urban renewal should define its new language of social justice. Most crucially, it must seize control of the narrative. Though legally closed, the Anna University case remains a battle of perception. If the DMK stays reactive, allowing its record to be drowned out by slogans and suspicion, it risks ceding the larger electoral script. In Tamil Nadu, politically sharp and emotionally engaged voters expect more than performance; they demand trust, which is earned constantly.
The DMK seems to have a strong chance in 2026. Stalin remains a credible leader, and the party's organisation is solid. But election results depend not just on incumbency or ideology but on timing, tone, and trust. The path to Fort St. George lies as much through governance as through the people's imagination. And in that realm, the verdict is never final. It is constantly being rewritten, tweet by tweet, poster by poster, speech by speech. The court may have ruled on Gnanasekaran. But in the court of public opinion, the DMK must still argue its case every single day, until the ballot speaks.
The writer is an education consultant and political analyst based in Bengaluru