Kerala BJP’s Enduring Factionalism: Party’s Gopakumar Pick Exposes Deep-Rooted Power Struggles
By Nanditha Subhadra
In a decisive intervention, the BJP central leadership has appointed B.B. Gopakumar, the first-time MLA from Chathannoor, as the NDA Legislative Party leader in the Kerala Assembly. The move is widely seen as a clear signal to the state’s warring heavyweights — state unit president Rajeev Chandrasekhar and former Union Minister V. Muraleedharan — to put their ambitions aside. With the BJP holding just three seats in the 140-member House after the 2026 Assembly elections, this internal discord highlights a party still struggling with chronic factionalism despite modest electoral gains.
The rivalry between Rajeev Chandrasekhar (who won from Nemom) and V. Muraleedharan (who narrowly won Kazhakootam) had intensified post-results, with both leaders reportedly eyeing the floor leadership position. Gopakumar’s elevation, even as he was considered for the Speaker’s post, underscores the high command’s preference for a neutral face over entrenched faction leaders. Rajeev Chandrasekhar offered public congratulations, but the underlying tensions remain palpable.
A Long History of Groupism
BJP’s Kerala unit has been dogged by factionalism for over a decade. The party’s first breakthrough came in 2016 when veteran O. Rajagopal became its inaugural MLA from Nemom, ending years of marginalization. However, even then, internal leadership crises surfaced.
Rajagopal himself admitted to a “leadership crisis” in the state unit in 2020, which hampered organizational activities.
Subsequent years saw multiple fault lines:
divisions between RSS-rooted traditionalists and “outsider” entrants,personal loyalties, and community-based lobbies. Leaders like K. Surendran, Sobha Surendran, V. Muraleedharan, and P.K. Krishnadas headed competing camps. Frequent reshuffles in district leadership, allegations of favoritism, and public snubs — such as senior leaders being sidelined from key meetings — became routine. The induction of high-profile figures like Rajeev Chandrasekhar in 2025 was intended to bridge these gaps and boost resources, but it instead layered new rivalries atop old ones.
Sobha Surendran’s Arrogance and the Palakkad Debacle The party’s internal woes were starkly visible in the high-profile defeat of Sobha Surendran in Palakkad. Despite a vigorous campaign backed by a rally addressed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Sobha Surendran lost to Congress candidate and actor Ramesh Pisharody by over 13,000 votes. Insiders and observers point to her perceived arrogance and overly assertive style as key reasons for the setback.
Critics noted that Sobha Surendran’s campaign
often appeared high-handed, alienating potential voters in a competitive constituency. Allegations of cash-for-votes on the eve of polling further damaged her image, despite her denials. Even within the party, factional differences in Palakkad reportedly led to lukewarm support from certain local groups. This loss was particularly painful as Palakkad had been viewed as a promising seat where consistent effort had built incremental gains in previous elections.
A Party at Crossroads
With breakthroughs in Nemom, Kazhakootam, and the Left bastion of Chathannoor, the BJP has its strongest-ever Assembly presence in Kerala. Yet the post-poll drama reveals a unit more focused on power-sharing than on converting this foothold into sustainable growth. The central leadership’s appointment of Gopakumar may offer a temporary truce, but it also spotlights the fragility of the organization.
For a party positioning itself as a viable third alternative to the LDF and UDF, such public infighting is counterproductive. Kerala voters rewarded the BJP modestly for its efforts; continued arrogance and groupism, as exemplified by cases like Sobha Surendran’s, risk squandering that goodwill. As the party prepares for future battles, the question remains: can it transcend its historical Kerala-centric ailments, or will personal ambitions once again derail its ambitions?
