General election in India 1996
The parliamentary elections in India in 1996 took place on April 27th and May 2nd and 7th, 1996. As in the two previous elections, neither party achieved an absolute majority of the seats. The previously ruling Congress Party clearly lost votes and seats in parliament and was no longer able to form a new government majority. The Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) rose for the first time - benefiting from the relative majority voting rights - to become the strongest party in the Lok Sabha . However, the BJP did not succeed in forming a majority for the formation of a government under its leadership, which is why a kind of compromise was reached to form a minority government under the Janata Dal .
prehistory
After the 1991 election, a minority government of the Congress Party under Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao was formed . The new prime minister faced a mountain of problems from the start. On the one hand, there were the two trouble spots Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab , which had been under president's rule for several years . H. the direct government of the central government. On the other hand, there was the increasing violence between Hindus and Muslims , especially in the northern Indian states, which was connected with the rise of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). In addition, there were disputes between members of individual castes , which had been fueled by the revival of the so-called Mandal Report under the previous government, VP Singh .
Economic crisis and reforms
The most immediate problem with Rao taking office was the economic crisis India found itself in 1991. At that time, the Indian economy was still very centrally organized according to a planned economy and India was sealed off from the world markets by high tariff barriers. Due to the unstable governments between 1989 and 1991, the eighth five-year plan, which should have started in 1990, had not yet been properly set in motion. The previous government under Chandra Shekhar also failed to approve the budget for 1991, so that a provisional budget for the current year was not decided until July 1991 under the Rao government. India's national debt had risen steadily since the 1979 oil crisis . From 1980 to 1991, the general government (i.e. central and state) budget deficit averaged at least about 8%, and the number is rising. The total public debt rose from 35% of gross domestic product in the 1980–81 fiscal year to 53% in 1990–91. The debt service to service these liabilities increased accordingly. While the central government had to spend only 4% of GDP on debt servicing in 1980–81, it was already 20% in 1990–91. The Indian trade balance and balance of payments developed increasingly negatively, as hardly any foreign investments flowed into the country due to the isolation of India from the world markets and the largely state-directed and controlled Indian economy. The Gulf War of 1990/91 exacerbated the problems by driving up the price of oil and remittances by Indian guest workers from the Gulf states. India's foreign exchange reserves fell to a threateningly low level in the first half of 1991. In order to continue to service the liabilities, the Indian central bank had to sell part of the national gold reserves . In addition, the country had to take special aid from the IMF , as well as bilateral aid from various countries, including Germany and Japan. India was thus close to national bankruptcy .
It was to the credit of Prime Minister Rao that he did not hesitate and that he immediately took energetic measures despite the weak position of his government. The economic expert Manmohan Singh , appointed by him to the government , initiated a radical change of course in economic policy as finance minister for India. In a first measure, the overvalued Indian rupee was significantly devalued. Singh also stated his intention to reduce the budget deficit by cutting spending and to open up India to foreign investment and the system of the so-called license raj , i. H. dismantling state licensing of commercial enterprises. This signified a clear departure from the previous principles of a self- sufficient and self-sufficient Gandhian economy and a socialist-inspired planned economy based on the ideas of Nehru , by which all Indian governments had previously been guided. However, the socialist model had lost its radiance significantly after the Soviet Union disintegrated between 1989 and 1991 and the economic disaster of the Soviet-style planned economy had revealed itself. Following the announcement by Singh, resistance arose from various quarters. Indian industrialists feared for their monopoly position on the Indian domestic market, socialists, the Janata Dal and also the BJP viewed with suspicion the prospect that foreign capital could buy up Indian companies. The reservations within the Congress party were also considerable. However, the criticisms grew lower when the economic situation improved again and the new measures began to bear fruit. India's foreign exchange reserves, which had reached an all-time low of US $ 1 billion in 1991, rose rapidly and amounted to US $ 14.7 billion in 1995 (in 2009 it was already 280 billion), the budget deficit decreased from 8 .4% in 1991 to 4.8% in 1995 and India's economic growth averaged 6.7% annually in 1992-97. While only US $ 200 million in foreign capital was invested in the country in the 1990/91 fiscal year, it was already US $ 4.7 billion in 1993/94. The economic boom also benefited the low-wage earners, albeit to a lesser extent, of course.
The temple-mosque controversy
A pressing domestic political problem was the controversy over the rebuilding of the Ram Janmabhumi Temple in place of the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya . The BJP, which had fueled this long-simmering dispute between Hindus and Muslims, had gained significantly in votes in the last election in 1991, occupied 23% of the parliamentary seats and repeatedly brought the issue onto the agenda. In September 1991, at the instigation of Rao, the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act was passed, which fixed the ownership structure of religious sites to the status of 1947 (shortly before independence). However, the site of the Babri Mosque was expressly excluded from the bill, as there was an open legal dispute here. However, other “rededications” of mosques into Hindu temples, such as those planned by radical Hindu organizations, were put to a legal stop. The law was rejected by radical Muslims and Hindus, notably the BJP. In July 1992, the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), the self-proclaimed “World Hindu Council”, declared that they could no longer wait and start rebuilding the temple. Numerous Hindu pilgrims then started moving towards Ayodhya. The Prime Minister was hesitant and tried to defuse the situation through negotiations. A BJP-led government was in power in the state of Uttar Pradesh and it made only half-hearted efforts to protect the mosque site, which was literally besieged by the Hindu pilgrims, with stronger police forces. On December 6, 1992, a mob of more than 100,000 so-called volunteers (Kar Sevaks) broke through the thin police barriers around the mosque. A little later, only a pile of stones and rubble was left of the Babri Mosque. Only now did the Prime Minister react by depositioning the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh , Kalyan Singh, and placing the state under president's rule . A few days later he also suspended the BJP Chief Ministers of Madhya Pradesh , Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh and placed the states concerned under president's rule . Radical Hindu organizations such as VHP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and individual Muslim organizations such as Islamic Sevak Sangh and Jamaat-e-Islami Hind were temporarily banned. The destruction of the mosque sparked outrage in the Islamic world around the world. Violent clashes between Hindus and Muslims broke out across India. The hardest hit was Bombay , where Shiv Sena ultra-nationalist leaders deliberately instigated the conflict. Around 900 people died in Bombay in December 1992 and January 1993. The Muslim underworld of Bombay responded with a series of car bomb attacks on March 12, 1993 that left 257 dead and 574 injured. Muslims accused the Prime Minister of being passive. Many Muslims turned their backs on the Congress Party, which had hitherto been considered the advocate of minorities in the country. Ayodhya was Rao's worst political neglect.
Caste politics
Another unsolved problem was the question of whether and to what extent the recommendations of the Mandal Commission regarding the reservation of 27% of government agencies and university places for the so-called Other Backward Classes (OBC) should be implemented. The Janata Dal government under VP Singh had tackled this in 1990 and thus triggered great expectations but also great resistance. Since the Singh government was replaced after a short time, there was hardly any implementation. The Rao government had to deal with this issue again. In the meantime, the members of the OBC, as well as the Dalits ( scheduled castes and scheduled tribes ) had been politicized by the propaganda of the Janata Dal. In 1992 the Samajwadi Party was founded in Uttar Pradesh , whose constituencies were essentially the backward castes . The Bahujan Samaj Party, which was founded in 1984 and also saw itself as a party of the Dalits and OBC, was also predominantly active in Uttar Pradesh and on the rise . Agreement was reached that the wealthy and well-to-do members of the OBC (the so-called "creamy layer" , the "icing on the cake"; membership of an OBC did not necessarily mean poverty or economic need, there were also very wealthy members of backward castes) should benefit from job reservation. On November 16, 1992, the Supreme Court of India passed a landmark judgment in the Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India . The reservation of a further 27% of the state agencies for the OBC (in addition to the 22.5% that the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes were entitled to) was declared legal. At the same time, however, Prime Minister Rao's attempt to reserve an additional 10% of the jobs for other economically backward social groups was rejected as not being constitutional. Rao had done this not least for reasons of election tactics to take the wind out of the sails of the Janata Dal. As a result of the judgment, the National Commission for Backward Classes Act came into effect on April 2, 1993 .
Development in Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir
The Punjab has been under presidents rule since 1987 . The violence between radicalized Sikhs and the security forces resulted in more than 1,000 deaths annually between 1987 and 1992, the majority of which came from the civilian population. In the parliamentary elections in 1991, no elections could take place in the 13 constituencies of Punjab due to the security situation. When the security forces had somewhat pushed back the Sikh extremists in early 1992, Prime Minister Rao held elections for the regional parliament and Lok Sabha in the Punjab in February 1992. The Congress Party emerged as the strongest party from the election, which took place under the massive protection of almost 250,000 security forces (army, paramilitaries, police). She won 12 out of 13 constituencies for Lok Sabha and 87 out of 117 seats in the Punjab Parliament. However, the turnout was only around 24% and 22% respectively, as radical Sikh organizations and Shiromani Akali Dal had called for an election boycott. Nevertheless, the election overall could be seen as a certain success and a step towards normality. A civil regional government was again established in Punjab under the Congress Party. The vast majority of the Punjabis welcomed the beginning normalization with the prospect of an end to the violence, and even in the local elections in Punjab in the same year the turnout was around 70%.
In Jammu and Kashmir, on the other hand, Rao and his advisors believed that an orderly holding of elections was not possible in view of the constant influx of armed rioters from neighboring Pakistan . The state remained under president's rule . Only after the 1996 elections for Lok Sabha were successfully held in Jammu and Kashmir did the new Indian government dare to hold elections for the regional parliament of Jammu and Kashmir in October 1996.
The Congress Party 1991–95
The circumstances of Rao's election as the top candidate of the Congress Party during the 1991 election campaign had made it clear to everyone that he was born out of necessity. In the Congress Party there were a number of other personalities and local party giants who in principle were also eligible for leadership positions. Rao, who was not a particularly charismatic personality and had a rather inconspicuous demeanor, therefore felt constantly compelled to outmaneuver his potential rivals in Congress and to consolidate his position of power in the party. Initially, Rao made an attempt to revive the intra-party democracy in the Congress Party, which had largely been lost under Indira and Rajiv Gandhi, and had intra-party elections for the Central Working Committee held (the first in 20 years). After the election, however, he seemed to have changed his mind and was probably afraid of an overly powerful board, so that he put the majority of the elected board members under flimsy pretexts to give up their office again. He did similar things with other institutions of the party, trying to keep them under his control. As a result, no real inner-party democracy and discussion culture could develop in the congress party, but that the politics of the congress party was determined by small, non-transparent power clusters. Under Rao, a system of nepotism , corruption and intrigue continued to rage in the Congress party .
In the elections to the state parliaments from 1993 to 1996, the Congress Party lost a number of important bastions. She was able to win Madhya Pradesh and the little Himachal Pradesh again, but lost Andhra Pradesh to the Telugu Desam Party , Karnataka to the Janata Dal and Maharashtra to a coalition of Shiv Sena and BJP. After the election defeats, there was an internal party revolt against the party leader and Prime Minister Rao. A parliamentary group of the Congress Party under Arjun Singh elected the local Congress Party leader in Uttar Pradesh, Narayan Dutt Tiwari, as the new chairman of the Congress Party. The dissidents were then expelled from the Congress party and founded their own party, the All India Indira Congress (Tiwari) (AIIC (T)). With the exclusion of these internal party critics and the electoral defeat of the potential internal party rival, the Chief Minister of Maharashtra Sharad Pawar in the election in Maharashtra, Rao's position in the Congress party was consolidated again.
Corruption scandals
The Rao government has been hit by a series of scandals that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has had its hands full investigating . In 1992 the so-called securities scandal became public, in which state banks had been manipulated into granting loans in the millions, which had then been gambled away on the stock exchange. The scandal cost the Indian taxpayer millions. Several ministers from Rao's cabinet had accepted bribes. In 1994 the great sugar scandal broke out . With a foreseeable shortage of sugar, sugar had been imported from abroad far too late, so that prices skyrocketed and the Indian state suffered millions in losses through subsidized sugar purchases and hasty imports, while speculators made profits.
In 1995 there was a vote of confidence in the Rao government in the Lok Sabha. The MP Shailendra Mahato ( Jharkhand Mukti Morcha ) voted for the government, but later said that he had been offered a sum of several million rupees from government circles.
In January 1996, the Jain Hawala scandal came to light. Industrialist Surindra Kumar Jain was accused between February 1988 and April 1991 of spending a total of US $ 18 million on bribing politicians and receiving perks in return. The accused included the BJP chairman LK Advani , who denied all allegations. Advani, however, resigned as the BJP's top candidate and left this role to Atal Bihari Vajpayee , who belonged to the moderate wing of the BJP and was considered absolutely incorruptible. There were no convictions in the hawala scandal. Also in 1996 allegations were made that the entrepreneur Lakhubhai Pathak paid a bribe of US $ 100,000 to two of Rao's stewards in 1984. For this, Pathak orders for paper deliveries have been promised. The allegation of direct participation by Rao was only made after the 1996 election. Rao was acquitted of these final allegations in 2003. A few weeks before the election, Bihar - one of the poorest and most underdeveloped states in India - showed the first signs of a fraud case of enormous proportions, which later became known as the fodder scam ("food fraud"). A dubious network of hundreds of criminals and corrupt politicians had embezzled government funds for animal feed and veterinary supplies for agriculture for nearly two decades. The damage amounted to the equivalent of several hundred million euros. Also involved was the Chief Minister of Bihar , Lalu Prasad Yadav (Janata Dal), who was forced to resign.
The so-called Vohra Report of 1993, which examined the interdependence of politics in India with organized crime and in some cases identified regular networks there, did not help to increase the reputation of politics among Indian voters . The report was originally only intended for internal use and not for publication, but excerpts were made public through whistleblowers .
Election campaign
Several large electoral alliances were formed before the election. The Congress Party concluded an electoral alliance with All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) in Tamil Nadu . The leadership of the Congress Party had conducted the negotiations with AIADMK against the express will of the regional leadership of the Congress Party in Tamil Nadu, which resulted in the majority of the regional Congress Party organization in Tamil Nadu, which continued to regard the AIADMK as a political opponent, split off from the parent party and ran under the name Tamil Maanila Congress (TMC) as an independent party in the election.
The Janata Dal, whose National Front alliance had largely disintegrated after the 1991 election defeat, tried to forge a new multiparty alliance. In alliance with the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) in Andhra Pradesh and the parties of the ruling Left Front in West Bengal ( CPI , CPM , RSP and AIFB ), she took up negotiations with other parties ( DMK in Tamil Nadu, AGP in Assam, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha in Bihar, Samajwadi Party, Bahujan Samaj Party, and others). The DMK and AGP decided not to join the new National Front - Left Front (NF-LF). AGP allied itself with the Left Front in Assam and the Bahujan Samaj Party made regional electoral agreements only in Madhya Pradesh with the Janata Dal, and also in Punjab with Shiromani Akali Dal . There were also ideological differences within the NF-LF, especially in the formulation of economic policy goals, so that it was not possible to agree on a real common election program, but only on a relatively vague Secular Democratic Alternative Program , its lowest common denominator the aim was to prevent a majority of the Congress Party as well as a government participation of the BJP. The NF-LF also lacked a convincing leadership personality.
The BJP also formed electoral alliances at the state level in Haryana with the Haryana Vikas Party (HVP), in Maharashtra with Shiv Sena and in Bihar with the Samata Party .
During the election campaign, the Congress Party emphasized its integrative role and thus its eligibility for all social groups and the need for a stable government. She referred to the successes of the previous economic policy and promised further reforms. The BJP spoke out in favor of a clear withdrawal of the state from the economy and a clearer strengthening of the private sector as well as increased investment in education and infrastructure. She continued to represent the aims of the Hindutva , but promised equal rights to all minorities and tried to distance herself cautiously from the riots in Ayodhya. Janata Dal emphasized the need for the state to play a strong role in the economy, but fundamentally advocated deregulation and liberalization. Certain key areas of the financial sector should remain under government control. Foreign capital in certain economic sectors was, however, generally supported. The communist parties, on the other hand, rejected economic liberalization and promised an extensive withdrawal of the relevant measures by the Rao government and an end to privatization.
Election mode and electoral process
As in all previous elections, the election was based on the relative majority vote in individual constituencies. The constituency boundaries were set by the Delimitation Commission of India in the 1970s based on the 1971 census. The elections could be held more or less properly in all 543 constituencies. The election was the first in 19 years in which all constituencies were voted again. This was last possible in 1977 . In the following elections, the elections in some parts of the country had to be canceled due to unrest ( 1980 in Assam , 1984 in Assam and Punjab , 1989 in Assam, 1991 in Jammu and Kashmir , in Punjab and in some constituencies of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar ) .
Compared to the last election in 1991, in which there were around 300 deaths due to violent riots, this time the election was much calmer and more orderly. About 70 people were killed as a result of clashes during the elections. The average turnout of 57.94% was slightly higher than in the previous election. The turnout was particularly low in Gujarat (35.92%), the lowest in any election in that state. Several possible reasons were given for this. The two big parties, the Congress Party and the BJP, did not paint a favorable picture in Gujarat. The latter was divided by fighting on the wing. On the other hand, the great summer heat probably contributed to keeping voters away from the ballot box.
| State or Union Territory |
electoral legitimate |
Voters | electoral participation |
Invalid votes |
Number of polling stations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andhra Pradesh | 49.501.274 | 31,196,679 | 63.02% | 2.30% | 61,409 |
| Arunachal Pradesh | 544.440 | 299,680 | 55.04% | 2.08% | 1,734 |
| Assam | 12,587,659 | 9,880,989 | 78.50% | 4.62% | 16,382 |
| Bihar | 58,438,317 | 34,744,087 | 59.45% | 1.48% | 82,920 |
| Goa | 869.093 | 489,547 | 56.33% | 1.41% | 1,135 |
| Gujarat | 28,529,094 | 10,248,650 | 35.92% | 2.36% | 34,951 |
| Haryana | 11,152,856 | 7,860,863 | 70.48% | 3.13% | 15,625 |
| Himachal Pradesh | 3,536,517 | 2,036,441 | 57.58% | 0.85% | 5,721 |
| Jammu and Kashmir | 4,455,709 | 2,181,594 | 48.96% | 4.85% | 6.158 |
| Karnataka | 31,810,069 | 19.155.432 | 60.22% | 2.28% | 44,348 |
| Kerala | 20,673,867 | 14,701,014 | 71.11% | 2.15% | 23,319 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 43,927,252 | 23,748,322 | 54.06% | 3.46% | 55,924 |
| Maharashtra | 55.254.414 | 28,979,021 | 52.45% | 2.12% | 73.935 |
| Manipur | 1,290,990 | 968.783 | 75.04% | 1.01% | 1,998 |
| Meghalaya | 1,092,753 | 673.372 | 61.62% | 2.18% | 1,544 |
| Mizoram | 408.094 | 299,593 | 73.41% | 0.90% | 786 |
| Nagaland | 874,518 | 772.402 | 88.32% | 0.73% | 1,564 |
| Orissa | 22,419,118 | 13,277,697 | 59.22% | 1.87% | 29,971 |
| Punjab | 14,489,825 | 9,019,302 | 62.25% | 2.12% | 17,895 |
| Rajasthan | 30,388,357 | 13,188,322 | 43.40% | 1.65% | 40.166 |
| Sikkim | 229.160 | 177,440 | 77.43% | 2.97% | 323 |
| Tamil Nadu | 42,488,022 | 28,438,885 | 66.93% | 4.39% | 54,542 |
| Tripura | 1,647,908 | 1,303,348 | 79.09% | 1.28% | 2,367 |
| Uttar Pradesh | 100.826.305 | 46.885.634 | 46.50% | 1.85% | 119,949 |
| West Bengal | 45,583,054 | 37,677,142 | 82.66% | 2.59% | 61,760 |
| Andaman and Nicobar Islands | 211,226 | 130.918 | 61.98% | 2.02% | 344 |
| Chandigarh | 450,599 | 263.189 | 58.41% | 1.59% | 539 |
| Dadra and Nagar Haveli | 94.909 | 73.032 | 76.95% | 3.02% | 123 |
| Daman and Diu | 70.202 | 49,606 | 70.66% | 2.25% | 82 |
| Delhi | 8,058,941 | 4,079,296 | 50.62% | 1.46% | 9,107 |
| Lakshadweep | 34.111 | 30,373 | 89.04% | 0.61% | 43 |
| Pondicherry | 633.635 | 477,437 | 75.35% | 3.58% | 798 |
| total | 592.572.288 | 343.308.090 | 57.94% | 2.44% | 767,462 |
Results
Overall result
The main loser in the election was the Congress Party, which lost nearly 7.5% of the vote and almost 40% of its parliamentary seats. It received 28.8% of the vote and was only represented in the new Lok Sabha with 140 seats (25.8%). This was by far the worst result she had ever achieved in an all-India election. The major losses in Congress were in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka. In the heavily populated states of the Ganges plain, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, the Congress Party hardly played a role anymore. In Tamil Nadu, the Congress Party did not win a single mandate. The votes she had previously received now went to the Tamil Maanila Congress, which split off from the Congress party shortly before the election. The main winner of the election was the BJP, which has won votes and mandates for the third time in a row since 1984. With a percentage of 20.29%, it achieved fewer votes than the Congress Party, but, thanks to the majority vote, it got 161 seats (29.7%). The main focus of the BJP was on Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, and the states of the " Hindi Belt". The third major political force, Janata Dal, lost votes and seats compared to the 1991 election, gaining 8.08% of the vote and 8.5% of the seats. The main focus of the Janata Dal lay in two states, Karnataka and Bihar, both of which were also ruled by her. The communist-socialist parties on the left front essentially maintained their votes and mandate and their bastion of West Bengal. The Samajwadi Party newly founded in 1992, came from a standstill to 17 constituencies in Uttar Pradesh, the Bahujan Samaj Party increased its mandate proportion compared to the last election from 2 to 11 increase in Maharashtra nationalist was Shiv Sena relatively successful and won 15 constituencies. In Tamil Nadu, the AIADMK, allied with the Congress Party, did not win a single constituency, while the rival DMK was successful in 17 constituencies.
| Political party | Abbreviation | be right | Seats | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| number | % | +/- | number | +/- | % | ||
| Indian National Congress | INC | 96,455,493 | 28.80% | 7.46% | 140 | 92 | 25.8% |
| Bharatiya Janata Party | BJP | 67.950.851 | 20.29% | 0.18% | 161 | 41 | 29.7% |
| Janata Dal | JD | 27.070.340 | 8.08% | 3.76% | 46 | 13 | 8.5% |
| Communist Party of India (Marxist) | CPM | 20,496,810 | 6.12% | 0.04% | 32 | 3 | 5.9% |
| Bahujan Samaj Party | E.G | 13,453,235 | 4.02% | 2.41% | 11 | 9 | 2.0% |
| Samajwadi party | SP | 10,989,241 | 3.28% | (New) | 17th | (New) | 3.1% |
| Telugu Desam Party | TDP | 9,931,826 | 2.97% | 0.02% | 16 | 3 | 2.9% |
| Tamil Maanila Congress | TMC | 7,339,982 | 2.19% | (New) | 20th | (New) | 3.7% |
| Samata party | SAP | 7,256,086 | 2.17% | (New) | 8th | (New) | 1.5% |
| Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam | DMK | 7,151,381 | 2.14% | 0.05% | 17th | 17 | 3.1% |
| Communist Party of India | CPI | 6,582,263 | 1.97% | 0.52% | 12 | 2 | 2.2% |
| Shiv Sena | SHS | 4,989,994 | 1.49% | 0.69% | 15th | 11 | 2.8% |
| All India Indira Congress (Tiwari) | AIIC (T) | 4,903,070 | 1.46% | (New) | 4th | (New) | 0.7% |
| Asom Gana Parishad | AGP | 2,560,506 | 0.76% | 0.22% | 5 | 4 | 0.9% |
| Shiromani Akali Dal | SAD | 2,534,979 | 0.76% | 0.01% | 8th | 2 | 1.5% |
| All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam | AIADMK | 2.130.286 | 0.64% | 0.98% | 0 | 11 | 0.0% |
| Revolutionary Socialist Party | RSP | 2,105,469 | 0.63% | 0.01% | 5 | 1 | 0.9% |
| Republican Party of India | RPI | 1,454,363 | 0.43% | 0.42% | 0 | 0.0% | |
| Jharkhand Mukti Morcha | JMM | 1,287,072 | 0.38% | 0.16% | 1 | 5 | 0.2% |
| All India Forward Bloc | AIFB | 1,279,492 | 0.38% | 0.08% | 3 | 0.6% | |
| Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam | MDMK | 1,235,812 | 0.37% | (New) | 0 | (New) | 0.0% |
| Haryana Vika's party | HVP | 1,156,322 | 0.35% | 0.23% | 3 | 2 | 0.6% |
| Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation | CPI (ML) L | 808.065 | 0.24% | 0.24% | 0 | 0.0% | |
| Muslim League | MUL | 757.316 | 0.23% | 0.08% | 2 | 0.4% | |
| Janata party | JNP | 631.021 | 0.19% | 3.18% | 0 | 5 | 0.0% |
| Karnataka Congress Party | KCP | 581,868 | 0.17% | (New) | 1 | (New) | 0.2% |
| Pattali Makkal Katchi | PMK | 571.910 | 0.17% | 0.30% | 0 | 0.0% | |
| Kerala Congress (M) | KEC (M) | 382.319 | 0.11% | 0.03% | 1 | 0.2% | |
| All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslims | AIMIM | 340.070 | 0.10% | 0.07% | 1 | 0.2% | |
| Madhya Pradesh Vikas Congress | MPVC | 337,539 | 0.10% | (New) | 1 | (New) | 0.2% |
| Autonomous State Demand Committee | ASDC | 180.112 | 0.05% | 1 | 0.2% | ||
| Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party | MGP | 129,220 | 0.04% | 0.02% | 1 | 1 | 0.2% |
| Sikkim Democratic Front | SDF | 124,218 | 0.04% | (New) | 1 | (New) | 0.2% |
| United Goans Democratic Party | UGDP | 109,346 | 0.03% | 0.03% | 1 | 1 | 0.2% |
| All other parties | 8,563,852 | 2.56% | 0.68% | 0 | 5 | 0.0% | |
| Independent | Independent | 21,041,557 | 6.28% | 2.12% | 9 | 8 | 1.7% |
| Valid votes | 334.873.286 | 100.0% | 543 | 22 | 100.0% | ||
| Registered voters / turnout | 592.572.288 | 57.94% | |||||
| Source: Election Commission of India | |||||||
- ↑ a b Regarding the seat gains and losses, it should be taken into account that an election took place nationwide in all 543 constituencies. In the last election in 1991, only 521 constituencies were elected.
- ↑ a b The Samajwadi Party (SP) was founded in 1992.
- ↑ a b Tamil Maanila Congress (TMC) was founded in 1996 as a split from the congress party.
- ↑ a b The Samata Party was founded in 1994 as a split from the Janata Dal.
- ↑ a b All India Indira Congress (Tiwari) (AIIC (T)) was founded in 1996 as a split from the Congress Party.
- ↑ a b The result of Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) is compared with the result of the 1989 election. In 1991 there was no election in Punjab.
- ↑ a b Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK) was founded in Tamil Nadu in 1994.
- ↑ a b The Karnataka Congress Party was founded in 1994 as a split from the Congress Party.
- ↑ a b Madhya Pradesh Vikas Congress was founded in 1996.
- ↑ a b Sikkim Democratic Front (SDF) was founded in 1993.
Result by state and union territories
The following table lists the electoral districts won by state / union territory.
| State / Union Territory |
Seats | BJP | Congress party |
Janata Dal |
Communist / left soc. Parties |
Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andaman and Nicobar Islands | 1 | INC 1 | ||||
| Andhra Pradesh | 42 | INC 22 |
CPI 2 CPM 1 |
TDP 16 AIMIM 1 |
||
| Arunachal Pradesh | 2 | Independent 2 | ||||
| Assam | 14th | BJP 1 | INC 5 |
CPM 1 ASDC 1 |
AGP 5 Independent 1 |
|
| Bihar | 54 | BJP 18 | INC 2 | JD 22 | CPI 3 |
SAP 6 SAP 1 JMM 1 Independent 1 |
| Chandigarh | 1 | BJP 1 | ||||
| Dadra and Nagar Haveli | 1 | INC 1 | ||||
| Daman and Diu | 1 | INC 1 | ||||
| Delhi | 7th | BJP 5 | INC 2 | |||
| Goa | 2 |
UGDP 1 MGP 1 |
||||
| Gujarat | 26th | BJP 16 | INC 10 | |||
| Haryana | 10 | BJP 4 | INC 2 |
HVP 3 Independent 1 |
||
| Himachal Pradesh | 4th | INC 4 | ||||
| Jammu and Kashmir | 6th | BJP 1 | INC 4 | JD 1 | ||
| Karnataka | 28 | BJP 6 | INC 5 | JD 16 | KCP 1 | |
| Kerala | 20th | INC 7 | JD 1 |
CPM 5 CPI 2 RSP 1 |
MUL 2 KEC (M) 1 Independent 1 |
|
| Lakshadweep | 1 | INC 1 | ||||
| Madhya Pradesh | 40 | BJP 27 | INC 8 |
BSP 2 MPVC 1 AIIC (T) 1 Independent 1 |
||
| Maharashtra | 48 | BJP 18 | INC 15 | SHS 15 | ||
| Manipur | 2 | INC 2 | ||||
| Meghalaya | 2 | INC 1 | Independent 1 | |||
| Mizoram | 1 | INC 1 | ||||
| Nagaland | 1 | INC 1 | ||||
| Orissa | 21st | INC 16 | JD 4 | SAP 1 | ||
| Punjab | 13 | BJP 3 | INC 2 | SAD 8 | ||
| Pondicherry | 1 | INC 1 | ||||
| Rajasthan | 25th | BJP 12 | INC 12 | AIIC (T) 1 | ||
| Sikkim | 1 | SDF 1 | ||||
| Tamil Nadu | 39 | CPI 2 |
TMC 20 DMK 17 |
|||
| Tripura | 2 | CPM 2 | ||||
| Uttar Pradesh | 85 | BJP 52 | INC 5 | JD 2 |
SP 16 BSP 6 AIIC (T) 2 SAP 1 Independent 1 |
|
| West Bengal | 42 | INC 9 |
CPM 23 RSP 4 AIFB 3 CPI 3 |
After the election
|
|
|
|
Atal Bihari Vajpayee (BJP, left), Prime Minister for 13 days in May 1996 and Deve Gowda (Janata Dal, right), Prime Minister from June 1, 1996
|
||
All parties and party coalitions had missed an absolute majority of the seats in the Lok Sabha. Therefore, President Shankar Dayal Sharma initially entrusted the leader of the BJP as the largest party with the formation of a government. On May 15, 1996, Atal Bihari Vajpayee was sworn in as Prime Minister and was given two weeks to gather a government majority behind him. A vote of confidence was scheduled for May 31, 1996. However, Vajpayee failed to bring the necessary majority together, so that after an intense debate in the Lok Sabha, which was broadcast live across the country for the first time, he resigned after only 13 days in office on May 28, 1996.
After assuring President Sharma that the Congress Party would tolerate a Janata Dal government under certain circumstances, he appointed Deve Gowda (Janata Dal) prime minister on June 1. Gowda managed to bring together an alliance of 10 parties, the United Front , which included the following parties: Janata Dal (mainly in Bihar and Karnataka), Telugu Desam Party (in Andhra Pradesh), DMK (in Tamil Nadu), Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party (in Goa), Madhya Pradesh Vikas Congress (in Madhya Pradesh), Asom Gana Parishad (in Assam), AIIC (T), Tamil Maanila Congress (in Tamil Nadu), Samajwadi Party (in Uttar Pradesh), Communist Party of India and was able to rely on the partial support of the Congress Party of the other three parties on the Left Front ( CPM , RSP , AIFB ). The first 10 parties together had 171, i. H. almost a third of the seats in parliament. The Jammu & Kashmir National Conference , which only had seats in the Rajya Sabha , joined the United Front later .
Individual evidence
- ↑ a b c d e Election Results - Full Statistical Reports. Indian Election Commission, accessed on December 22, 2018 (English, election results of all Indian elections to the Lok Sabha and the parliaments of the states since independence).
- ↑ 1991–92: A REVIEW, Annual Report 1991–1992. Planning Commission, Government of India, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ^ K. Shankar Bajpai: India in 1991: New Beginnings. Asian Survey, Vol. 32, No. 2, A Survey of Asia in 1991: Part II (Feb. 1992), pp. 207-216. JSTOR 2645220
- ↑ a b Saraogi, Ravi: Macro Management and Business Environment: Analysis of the 1991 Indian Economic Crisis. In: Perspectives of Future Economists in South Asia No. 1 (2008): pp. 43-53.
- ↑ a b Nirupam Bajpai: Economic Crisis, Structural Reforms, and the Prospects of Growth in India. (PDF) Retrieved November 22, 2014 .
- ↑ a b c d e f g h Ranbir Vohra: The Making of India - A Political History. 3rd edition 2013, ME Sharpe, Inc. ISBN 978-0-7656-2367-6 . Chapter India under Prime Minister Narasimha Rao , p. 281 ff
- ^ Lalit K. Jha: RBI Buys 200 MT Gold from IMF. outlookindia.com, November 3, 2009, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ↑ Maulana Wahiduddin Khan: Babri Masjid Revisited. The Times of India, October 12, 2010, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ↑ Syed Shahabuddin: Babri Masjid: From construction to demolition. Arab News, July 29, 2012, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ^ Sanjoy Hazarika: India issues a ban on 5 rival groups. The New York Times, December 11, 1992, accessed March 24, 2016 .
- ↑ Why there's no noise about the Mumbai riots. rediff.com, February 4, 2014, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ^ Former Sena MP gets one-year for '93 Mumbai riots. rediff.com, July 9, 2008, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ↑ 1993 serial blasts: Salem's trial begins today. April 15, 2008, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ↑ Sheela Bhatt: Babri Masjid demolition: Biggest blot on Rao's career. rediff.com, December 24, 2004, accessed November 22, 2014 .
- ↑ Know your party: Samajwadi Party. rediff.com, May 7, 2004, accessed November 25, 2014 .
- ↑ BJ Reddy: Supreme Court of India: Indra Sawhney Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Others, Etc. … On November 16, 1992. indiancanon.org, accessed on November 28, 2014 (English).
- ^ Opinion - Editorials: Reservation and economic criteria. The Hindu, August 14, 2003, accessed November 28, 2014 .
- ^ National Commission for Backward Classes. Retrieved November 24, 2014 .
- ↑ Martha Crenshaw (Ed.): Terrorism in Context. Penn State University Press 1995. p. 354 . ISBN 978-0-271-01014-4 .
- ↑ Barbara Crossette: Extremists in India Kill 80 on 2 Trains As Voting Nears End. The New York Times, June 16, 1991, accessed October 18, 2014 .
- ^ Edward A. Gargan: 49 Slain by Gunmen on Train in India. The New York Times, December 27, 1991, accessed October 18, 2014 .
- ↑ Gurharpal Singh: The Punjab Elections 1992: Breakthrough or Breakdown? Asian Survey Vol. 32, No. 11 (Nov 1992), pp. 988-999 JSTOR 2645266
- ^ A b c d Sudha Pai: Transformation of the Indian Party System: The 1996 Lok Sabha Elections . Asian Survey, Vol. 36, No. 12 (Dec. 1996), pp. 1170-1183 JSTOR 2645573
- ^ Edward A. Gargan: Huge Financial Scandal Shakes Indian Politics. June 9, 1992, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ↑ Pravin Palande: Economic Milestone: Stock Market Scam (1992). Forbes India, August 20, 2014, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ↑ Shefali Rekhi, Alam Srinivas: The great sugar scandal. indiatoday, June 30, 1994, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ^ Pay no attention to JMM leader's statement: Rao. rediff.com, August 20, 1997, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ↑ THE HAWALA SCAM. The Indian Mirror, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ↑ Chronology of Lakhubhai Pathak case. rediff.com, December 22, 2003, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ↑ : Nirnimesh Kumar case Narasimha Rao acquitted in Lakhubhai Pathak. The Hindu, December 23, 2003, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ↑ John F. Burns: Fodder Scam 'Could Bring Down a Shaky Indian Government. The New York Times, July 2, 1997, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ↑ TSR Subramanian: Vohra's report was secret, but India's race to ruin is for all to see. The New Indian Express, November 11, 2012, accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ^ Prasad Mahendra, Rekha Singh: India at the Polls: Parliamentary Elections in the Federal Phase. Sangam Books Ltd (March 26, 2003), ISBN 81-250-2328-3 . P. 117
- ^ United Front's Common Minimum Program - A Review. Communist Party of India (Marxist), accessed November 30, 2014 .
- ^ Ashis Ray: India election generally peaceful. CNN, May 7, 1996, accessed November 23, 2014 .
- ↑ Priyavadan Patel: Sectarian mobilization, factionalism and Voting in Gujarat. Economic and Political Weekly, 34, No. 34/35 (Aug 21 -3 Sep 1999), pp 2423-2433 JSTOR 4408337
- ↑ Atal Bihari Vajpayee Speech in Parliament on Confidence Motion PART 1 + PART 2 , Vajpayee's speech in Lok Sabha on May 27, 1996 (YouTube video, Hindi)
- ^ E. Sridharan: Why are multi-party minority governments viable in India? Theory and comparison . In: Commonwealth & Comparative Politics . tape 50 , no. 3 , 2012, p. 314–343 , doi : 10.1080 / 14662043.2012.692925 (English).
- ^ National Conference To Join United Front. Business Standard, October 3, 1996, accessed May 16, 2015 .
| British India elections |
 |
|
| Elections to the Lok Sabha |
1951–1952 • 1957 • 1962 • 1967 • 1971 • 1977 • 1980 • 1984 • 1985 (Assam & Punjab) • 1989 • 1991 • 1992 (Punjab) • 1996 • 1998 • 1999 • 2004 • 2009 • 2014 • 2019 |
|
| Presidential election |
1952 • 1957 • 1962 • 1967 • 1969 • 1974 • 1977 • 1982 • 1987 • 1992 • 1997 • 2002 • 2007 • 2012 • 2017 |