What Led to the Political Wilderness of O Panneerselvam and S Ramadoss After Decades of Influence?

After Decades Of Wielding Influence, O Panneerselvam And S Ramadoss Now Find Themselves In The Political Wilderness‘Indecisiveness led to OPS’s isolation’
Come Sept, it will be 25 years since O Panneerselvam became chief minister of Tamil Nadu for the first time. He held the post on two more occasions, a gift for his loyalty towards the late chief minister J Jayalalithaa and her aide V K Sasikala.


But now, decades after his entry into politics from Periyakulam in Theni district, OPS is at a crossroads. AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K Palaniswami has refused to re-induct him into the party. His supporters have abandoned him, and the BJP too has chosen not to accord him the same importance he was given once. T T V Dhinakaran, who met him at the Thevar gurupooja last year and gave a joint press meet vowing to defeat the “betrayer EPS”, has now joined ranks with EPS.

On Thursday when OPS held a meeting in Theni, there were only a few dozen present. None were notable political functionaries.

The fall from grace has not been sudden, but a gradual slide over the past few years. “It was a fall waiting to happen. We tried our best to stop it, but could not,” says former MLA A Subburathinam, an OPS supporter turned DMK member. “But he has now let leaders as well as cadres down.”

Years ago, when he was elevated as caretaker chief minister in 2001 and 2014, it was because he was considered a dutiful lieutenant who would warm the seat for his leader. If loyalty catapulted him to fame, it was his rebellion that promoted him to a larger stature. He emerged from the shadow of Jayalalithaa, challenged Sasikala and evolved as a leader in his own right when he launched the ‘dharmayudham’ in Dec 2016. AIADMK veterans queued up in front of his house and scores of party cadres thronged his meetings.

“Only a few political careers in Tamil Nadu capture the arc of rise and decline as sharply as that of OPS,” says Subburathinam. A three-time CM and once seen as the moral counterweight to the Sasikala family, OPS now stands politically isolated. Some of his supporters rejoined AIADMK, some have moved to DMK and a few others to TVK.
“His fall is of his own making,” says former AIADMK MP K C Palaniswamy (KCP), among the first to support OPS when he launched the dharmayudham.

Though OPS’s rebellion against the Sasikala clan in 2017 struck a chord with cadres and public sympathy swung towards him, the support dwindled within months, when he reconciled with EPS, citing party unity. The merger restored stability to the AIADMK govt but marked the first major erosion of OPS’s credibility. Supporters who saw him as a rebel with a cause felt betrayed.

“When he merged his faction with EPS’s in 2017, OPS became deputy chief minister and party coordinator. But what did his supporters, except for K P Munusamy, get,’’ asks KCP. Another flaw was his friction with EPS when he fought and got a Rajya Sabha seat for R Dharmar. This friction eventually led to his expulsion from AIADMK. “Dharmar was from his own community (thevar). Fighting for someone from your own community sends the wrong signal,” says KCP.

Over the years, EPS steadily consolidated power within the AIADMK. OPS, by contrast, failed to build an independent base and did not retain the support he had.

OPS’s former supporters say his “lack of political shrewdness, over-dependence on BJP and reluctance to fulfil expectations of followers” have resulted in a gradual erosion of his base. “More than anything else, it’s his indecisiveness that has forced many to leave him,” says Subburathinam. Former AIADMK minister R Vaithilingam too says OPS’s “indecisiveness” was why he switched to DMK. “His quiet demeanour, once seen as humility, no longer appeals to supporters.”

The exodus of supporters had made the BJP cut its offer of six seats a few months ago to three. To top it, the three are under AMMK’s quota. OPS has not responded yet to the offer but appealed instead for reinduction into AIADMK.

OPS supporters defend him. “His demand is for unification of AIADMK and not for short-term political gains. This is a lofty goal which needs a cautious approach, not a hasty decision,” says a supporter.

‘Handing Anbumani the reins altered dynamics’

Tamil Nadu’s parties have traditionally handled film stars with caution, given the close link between cinema and politics in the state. Actors often doubled as political mascots and vote mobilisers. Criticism, when it came, was usually directed at stars aligned with rival camps. Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK), however, was an exception.

The party never hesitated to take on leading actors. It had a long-running feud with superstar Rajinikanth after he criticised forest brigand Veerappan. Actor Vijay too was not spared. In 2017, PMK founder S Ramadoss demanded that the smoking scenes in the Vijay-starrer ‘Sarkar’ be removed for “sowing seeds of poison among the youth”. PMK cadres followed up with protests against the actor.

Ramadoss clearly did not anticipate that seven years later Vijay would launch a political party. Even less expected was the prospect of PMK leaders exploring an alliance with Vijay’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK).

If such a tie-up materialises, the 86-year-old founder of the 36-year-old PMK would find himself campaigning for a political outfit that is barely two years old. The shift is telling of the slide in the influence Ramadoss wields.

For more than three decades, Ramadoss was among the most influential vanniyar leaders in Tamil Nadu, say political observers. As the undisputed voice of the community, he was aggressively courted by DMK and AIADMK in every election. His alliance choices were closely watched, often seen as decisive in tightly fought contests.

Today, Ramadoss finds himself overshadowed by his son, distanced from former allies and isolated by a large section of his supporters. The reason for the falling clout, obviously, is the split from his son Anbumani Ramadoss. Most PMK functionaries have chosen to side with Anbumani, leaving only a fraction with him.

“Ayya was exceptional at reading the public mood and predicting outcomes. But he could not foresee that PMK would not function without Anbumani,” says party spokesperson K Balu, now an Anbumani supporter.

At his peak, Ramadoss remained relevant through a blend of caste assertion and political pragmatism, ensuring PMK’s presence mattered regardless of whether the party aligned with DMK or AIADMK.

Balu says when major parties used to wait for his alliance decision, minor parties too would be keenly observing him. “They felt Ayya would know the pulse and the party he aligns with would win the polls,” says Balu.

The signs of his waning influence emerged after the leadership transition. The decision to hand control to Anbumani altered the party’s internal dynamics. Unlike Ramadoss, who thrived on agitation and grassroots mobilisation, Anbumani attempted to reposition PMK as a policy-driven party that spoke of environmental protection and employment generation.

Even as he brought administrative changes in the party, Anbumani gained national visibility by building connections with BJP leaders. This duality helped PMK. Ramadoss retained the traditional cadre base while Anbumani wooed new voters. But, over time, the founder’s authority within the party started declining, eventually leading to the split which diluted Ramadoss’s bargaining power.

Recent political developments indicate his shrinking alliance options. Though the BJP reached out to Ramadoss with an alliance offer ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit last week, talks failed due to Ramadoss’s resentment over BJP’s parallel engagement with his son. He further moved away from BJP when PMK’s mango symbol was displayed on the backdrop of the stage at Modi’s public meeting where Anbumani participated.

Ramadoss then started praising DMK, seen as an apparent bid to strike an alliance. But that door was shut with VCK chief Thol Thirumavalavan, a long-time ally of DMK, warning that he would walk out of the DMK front if PMK was roped in. Ramadoss immediately turned critical of DMK. As choices narrowed, TVK emerged as a possible option.

Once a leader who dictated alliance terms, Ramadoss now finds himself on the margins of TN politics. The buzz that marked his Thailapuram residence has thinned, and his statements no longer command the political attention they once did. Ramadoss supporters are hopeful that the scenario would change. “This is only a temporary phase,” says PMK MLA R Arul. “After the election, Ayya’s position will change. He will regain his influence.”

His supporters say Ramadoss still commands respect among vanniyars, even if party supporters had deserted. “Vanniyar people will always see him as a deity,” says one.
But political analysts say the coming election could be more about retaining his relevance than about regaining influence.