Even as the demand for “single leadership” in the AIADMK picked up momentum, party coordinator O. Panneerselvam on Wednesday appealed to its workers to remain calm.
Mr. Panneerselvam made his appeal through his Twitter handle, in the light of protests by a section of his supporters over the damage caused to posters pasted in different parts of Chennai, urging him to take over the leadership of the party.
Earlier, during the course of the day, two groups led by party co-coordinator Edappadi K. Palaniswami and Mr. Panneerselvam were engaged in confabulations among themselves to chalk out their strategies in the run-up to the general council’s meeting slated for June 23. Certain sections of party leaders were said to have discussed the possibility of the general council’s meeting getting deferred on account of the row over the nature of leadership.
Also, there were open declarations of support for the two leaders. After meeting Mr. Panneerselvam and Mr. Palaniswami, former Forests Minister and the party’s Dindigul (west) district secretary, Dindigul C. Sreenivasan, openly stated that he stood by the latter. When asked what had prompted the revival of the demand when the two leaders were elected together about six months ago, Mr. Sreenivasan, who was accompanied by Puratchi Thalaivi Peravai State secretary and former Revenue Minister R.B. Udhayakumar, told The Hindu that a majority of the party functionaries were favouring Mr. Palaniswami, and the present situation had to be strengthened.
Former MLA ‘Covai’ K. Selvaraj, known to be a supporter of the coordinator, emphasised that it was Mr. Panneerselvam who should lead the party as he had, in the interests of party unity and continuance of “Amma’s [Jayalalithaa’s] government”, agreed to merge his group with that of Mr. Palaniswami. He criticised former Fisheries Minister D. Jayakumar for having revealed publicly the contents of the discussion, and argued that he had no authority to do so.
One of the deputy coordinators R. Vaithilingam, who met Mr. Panneerselvam on Tuesday, said that while one section was for the retention of the present arrangement, another favoured “single leadership”. Again, one set of people wanted Mr. Palaniswami to take charge, whereas another group suggested the name of Mr. Panneerselvam.
