The New Delhi elections bore witness to an intense battle of narratives, with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) promising a double-engine sarkaar to voters while battering the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) for its failures in governance, and its myriad corruption scandals. While the AAP attempted to reframe the discourse to welfare, and the Centre-State conflict, it nonetheless resulted in a rout for the party. The writers of these narratives, however, were not named on constituency tickets, but worked in the background, to prepare, package and professionalise the parties in fray.
India’s tryst with political consultancy firms has been well documented. It started with Viplav Communications (founded in 2003) assisting a newer generation of MPs with their campaigns. It rose to prominence by strategising the Naveen Patnaik-led Biju Janata Dal’s campaign in the Odisha Assembly elections of 2009. A distinct marker was the use of novelties such as the SuperCaller, which enabled them to reach hundreds of thousands of voters daily with pre-recorded messages. Since then, an outcrop of firms, including the Populus Empowerment Network (PEN), Showtime Consulting and JPAC Persona have consolidated their positions as important stakeholders in Indian elections. They have been hired by parties like the BJP and the Congress as well as regional parties like the Trinamool Congress, and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. With respect to AAP, IPAC (Indian Political Action Committee) spearheaded its campaign for the New Delhi elections.
Americanising Indian elections
The rise of political consultancy firms represents an increasing ‘Americanisation’ of Indian election campaigns. These firms work in a war room-like setting with professionals from the IITs, IIMs and NLUs. They focus on data collection through voter surveys, social media and micro-targeted digital campaigns. The consultancy firms’ ability to introduce sophisticated campaign technologies enable parties to shift from traditional ground-level mobilisation to tech-driven voter engagement.
Traditionally, Indian elections were party-driven, with political ideologies and grassroots mobilisation playing a dominant role. However, there is a trend towards personality-centric campaigns, where individual leaders overshadow their parties. Consultancy firms build a U.S.-presidential style campaign narrative around individual leaders rather than party ideology or collective leadership. The influential role of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in winning elections for the BJP, or the Congress constantly relying on Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi for their electoral prospects elucidate this trend.
The nature of political campaigns has also evolved into a more permanent and continuous process. Political leaders and parties remain in a perpetual state of campaigning, using social media narratives, television appearances, and frequent rallies to maintain voter engagement even between elections. The increasing reliance on television and digital media has further reinforced the role of political consultants, with political advertising, cinematic-style campaign videos, and aggressive PR campaigns becoming common features of Indian elections.
The erasure of party cadre
As political consultancy firms continue to gain a foothold in Indian politics, their consolidation also reflects a deeper institutional problem within India’s political parties. In a democracy, political parties serve as an intermediary between the state and the people and perform multiple functions by doing so. They mobilise the electorate by engaging with citizens, understanding the issues which affect them and articulating them through their manifestos and policy solutions. However, the functioning of political parties in India is plagued by numerous problems.
There is a concentration of power within top leadership in many parties, especially regional parties such as the Trinamool Congress, the Nationalist Congress Party and Samajwadi Party, which resemble single family outfits, and are controlled by their satraps. Decisions on aspects ranging from the nomination of candidates to deciding the basic stance and strategy of the party reflect the diktats of top leadership rather than the democratic collective choice of the party as a whole. With party cadres increasingly being unheard, underfunded, and unorganised, political parties became institutionally weak which left a vacuum that has now been occupied by political consultancy firms. A senior consultant who was involved in the Maharashtra elections (2024) remarked that ‘political consultancy firms are hired by the top leadership of the party and directly engage with them for poll campaigning’. They undertake the very tasks which the cadre of a party is supposed to undertake — relay the feedback of the public to the top leadership of the party, understand the issues of the electorate, take voter surveys and frame pertinent issues for the polls among others.
While the involvement of consultants could boost electoral prospects of a party, its latent effects necessitate further scrutiny. In relying on consultants to understand ground realities in politics, political parties essentially bypass their cadre. Moreover, the feedback of consultants is often prioritised over that of the party workers/local leaders/MLAs. According to a consultant recently involved in the Delhi elections, this also creates friction between the consultants and party workers who feel their role is being deliberately undermined by ‘outsiders’. The dominance of the political consultant, coupled with personality-cult politics, systematically sidelines the cadre structure and prevents the growth of independent power centres within a party.
With the increasing involvement of political consultancy firms within party structures, concerns have also emerged about unelected individuals exerting a disproportionate influence over decisions that should rest solely with democratically elected representatives. In the case of the Trinamool Congress-I-PAC collaboration in West Bengal, there were allegations that the consultancy firm wielded significant influence over ticket distribution, the selection of key poll issues, and even governance after the party had come to power. It raises important questions about the accountability of these firms in a democracy and the extent of their impact on political parties.
By outsourcing such functions to politically neutral or ‘agnostic’ professionals who focus solely on the process of campaigning itself, the ideological platform of a party becomes second fiddle. Politics is deeply ideological, tumultuous, and contradictory, but not an inconvenience to be bypassed. When these aspects of electioneering are outsourced to a firm, it weakens the link between the political party and the voters.
While the impact of political consultancy firms on our politics continues to remain murky, there are disturbing indicators of how they can de-institutionalise political parties in the name of business. The clientele of these firms — the political parties — must grapple with their reality, rather than shy away from it. They must work towards institutional strength, bolster their internal democracy and constantly engage with citizens to fulfil their mandate as important stakeholders of a democracy. For the long term, parties need to go back to the drawing board and revisit their founding principles.
Aadya Narain is a student at Jindal Global Law School. Divyansh Nautiyal studies at the NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad
Published – February 26, 2025 08:30 am IST