The South’s Muted Voice as Political Power Shifts North

Context:

At the 31st Southern Zonal Council meeting, concerns were raised that population-based delimitation could reduce the relative political influence of southern States, despite their better performance in population control and human development. 

Declining Southern Influence in National Politics: 

• Although the national movement was led largely by leaders from northern, western and eastern India, leaders such as C. Rajagopalachari, T. Prakasam, K. Kamaraj, S. Nijalingappa and E.M.S. Namboodiripad ensured substantial southern participation in national politics.
• After Independence, national parties continued to produce influential southern leaders. However, only P.V. Narasimha Rao became a Prime Minister from southern India who completed a full five-year term.
• Much of the South’s subsequent influence came through regional leaders such as M.G. Ramachandran, Jayalalithaa, N.T. Rama Rao, H.D. Deve Gowda and N. Chandrababu Naidu. During the coalition era, regional parties exercised considerable influence over national policymaking. The return of strong parliamentary majorities and centralised party leadership has reduced this bargaining space.

The 2026 Legislative Attempt: 

In April 2026, the government introduced proposals to:

• increase the Lok Sabha’s maximum strength from 550 to 850
• allow delimitation using the latest published Census, which would then have meant the 2011 Census
• operationalise women’s reservation through this exercise.

However, the 131st Constitutional Amendment Bill was defeated in the Lok Sabha in April 2026. Thus, the constitutional issue remains unresolved. 

The Delimitation Question: 

• At the Southern Zonal Council meeting, Karnataka sought the continuation of the 1971 Census as the basis for inter-State allocation of Lok Sabha seats for another 25 years. It also demanded that the strength of the Lok Sabha remain at 543 and that women’s reservation be implemented without altering the regional balance.
• However, the southern States did not present a completely united position. While some supported retaining the present distribution, others merely sought protection against any reduction in their existing proportional share. Differences over river waters, party politics and dependence on Union assistance have inhibited the emergence of a common southern platform.

Constitutional Background: 

• Article 81 provides for allocation of Lok Sabha seats among States broadly according to population.
• Article 82 requires readjustment of parliamentary constituencies after every Census through parliamentary law.
• Article 170: Delimitation of State Assembly constituencies.
• The 42nd Amendment, 1976 froze inter-State allocation based on the 1971 Census to avoid penalising States implementing population control.
• The 84th Amendment, 2001 extended the freeze until publication of the first Census conducted after 2026.
• The 87th Amendment, 2003 allowed internal constituency boundaries to be readjusted using the 2001 Census without altering each State’s total seats.
• The 106th Amendment, 2023 links one-third reservation for women in legislatures to delimitation following the first Census after its commencement.

Delimitation and the Wider North-South Federal Unease: 

• Demographic success and redistribution of political power: 
  • Southern States fear being penalised for successfully implementing national population-stabilisation policies. The latest SRS data show TFRs of 1.3 in Tamil Nadu and Kerala and 1.5 in Karnataka and Telangana, compared with 2.9 in Bihar and 2.6 in Uttar Pradesh.
  • The five southern States currently hold 129 of 543 Lok Sabha seats. Under a population-based redistribution using the 2011 Census:
    • Tamil Nadu could decline from 39 to 32 seats and Kerala from 20 to 15
    • Uttar Pradesh could rise from 80 to 89, Bihar from 40 to 46, and Rajasthan from 25 to 30.
  • Even if every State gains seats after expanding the Lok Sabha, the South’s relative share and bargaining power could decline. 

• Weakening of the federal chamber: The 2026 proposal could have increased the Lok Sabha-Rajya Sabha ratio from approximately 2.2:1 to 3.3:1, without increasing the Rajya Sabha’s maximum strength of 250. This would strengthen the Lok Sabha during joint sittings and diminish the relative role of the Rajya Sabha in presidential and vice-presidential elections.
• Fiscal federalism: The five southern States’ combined share in divisible central taxes declined from approximately 17.98% under the 14th Finance Commission to 15.80% under the 15th. The 16th Finance Commission partially corrected this to about 17% by introducing a 10% weight for contribution to GDP and redefining demographic performance. Nevertheless, concerns remain because cesses and surcharges are excluded from the divisible pool.
• Weak federal dialogue and fragmented southern response: The Inter-State Council has met only 11 times since 1990, most recently in 2016, while the National Development Council last met in 2012. At the same time, disputes over the Cauvery, Krishna and Mullaperiyar waters, contrasting political alliances and varying dependence on Union assistance prevent southern States from developing a unified federal position. 

However, a continued freeze also conflicts with “one person, one vote, one value.” Based on the 2011 population, a Bihar MP represented approximately 26 lakh people, compared with around 17 lakh for a Kerala MP. The dilemma is therefore between equal voting power for citizens and protection of States that achieved national demographic objectives.

Way Forward: 

• Reach a consensus-based delimitation settlement that prevents any State from losing its existing representation or relative share during the next cycle.
• Develop a consensus formula combining population with demographic performance and federal balance.
• Expand or strengthen the Rajya Sabha alongside the Lok Sabha to prevent dilution of its federal role.
• Ensure an independent Delimitation Commission, transparent criteria, public hearings and safeguards against partisan gerrymandering.
• Delink women’s representation from avoidable federal disputes through a consensual constitutional route.
• Convene the Inter-State Council regularly and use it for advance consultation on delimitation.
• Continue rewarding demographic performance and economic contribution through Finance Commission transfers.

The concern over the South’s declining political influence is not merely a regional grievance. It concerns the balance between representative democracy and cooperative federalism. 

A durable settlement must respect the equality of citizens while ensuring that States are not penalised for successfully achieving national development and population objectives.

PDF