What are pressure groups?

As the name indicates, these refer to such organizations or groups of a non-political nature, whose purpose is to influence the policy decisions of the government in their favour. They seek to accomplish such an objective by mounting pressure on the government through the use of such techniques and tactics which may range from the simplest kinds of mass protests, sloganeering to the most extremes of selective mass killings and individual assassinations. Given the range of their techniques thus, emerge a variety of such pressure groups in any democratic polity.

Nevertheless, whatever may be the range of their activities and techniques, a universal fact has come to stay that they have come to accepted in both hands in any democracy and invariably, perform a significant role of making a democracy alive besides, making the government to confine to the right side of their working rather than getting swayed to the influence of a particular section, class or group of the community where it seeks to get more political advantages. It is thus may not be wrong to describe them as kind of a balance-wheel in any functional democracy operating anywhere in the world…

On the above analogy, we can convincingly say that the “pressure groups” are 'interest groups' as well as 'influence groups'.

They are not solely political organizations and unlike political parties, they do not put up their candidates for elections. We may also call such groups as "private associations formed to influence the public policy."

They are a medium through which people with common interests may endeavour to affect the course of public affairs. In this sense, any social group which seeks to influence the behaviour of administrators and parliamentarians, without attempting to gain formal control of the government, can be said to be a pressure groups.'

Genesis of pressure groups in Indian Polity: The development of pressure groups in India's political system is generally regarded as a vital element in the process of political modernization, insofar as; it represents a response to increasing functional differentiation and to the breakdown of traditional types of authority. Since Independence, after the adoption of modern political system, the most of dominant interest articulators in India have not been the social and economic interests but their still pervasive forms manifested in caste, community, regional, religious and language antecedents. Many observers, however, feel that the Indian political system is moving towards a period in which the aggregation of political demands of all sectors, modern and traditional, will come to play a much more significant role than in the past.

Meaning and definition of pressure groups

Simply defined, “Pressure groups” are non-political groups; though they are engaged in some kind of politics, directly or indirectly, but their politics is essentially that of policy only.  They are organized groups which attempt to influence government decisions without seeking themselves to exercise the formal powers of government. Nevertheless, such groups are a far more important channel of communication than the political parties are insofar as the transmission of political ideas from the mass of the citizenry to the rulers is concerned.

So far as their objective is concerned, Pressure groups are concerned with specific issues. They use their means and persuasive powers to obtain certain political decisions without having or seeking the power to make them.

Thus, the Pressure groups are those influence groups which have organized themselves for the purposes of influencing the public policies. To achieve this objective, they attempt to exert influence over the government or parliament or even local authorities without seeking themselves to become a part of the government. This way, they act as a sort of conduit through which the public opinion and demands are transmitted across to the government and hence, personify some kind of auxiliary drains of representation.

A-priori thus, the prime function of a pressure group is to promote the interests of its members and pressurize the government. They are concerned with specific issues and self interest is the basic cause of their formation. They are non-political entities. They are involved in the political process but are not willing to assist in forming a government if called upon to do so. They have no political programme or agenda as such. They are the medium through which the function of articulation is performed in a political system.

Significance and Role of Pressure Groups in Indian Polity

Although, to begin with, the pressure groups anywhere in the world, were generally viewed with suspicion, alarm and moral indignation. It was believed that they lead to a distortion of the democratic process. But then, keeping in view their contribution in a modern democracy which recognizes fundamental rights as an entrenched part of their legal system, these pressure groups came to be gradually recognized by any society as much indispensable as the existence of political parties such that today they are regarded not only as a necessary evil but a healthy factor in the changing political dynamics. Their significance is so vital in a democratic order that it even led to a renowned sociologist to remark:  “Organized groups may be regarded as a system of private government while the organs of a State represent a system of public government.”

In any democratic society with rule of law, forming the core of Constitutionalism, a number of factors have generally been attributed to not only the emergence and growth of such groups, but also to the increasing importance of such pressure groups.

Some of such factors may be delineated as below:

Firstly, pressure groups are inevitable in democratic order as they balance the nation and particular interests. They constitute an important link of communication between the citizen and the government.

Secondly, pressure groups render a necessary service in a democracy by making much valuable data available to governmental agencies and to the public in general. They supply necessary information and accurate statistic to policy-makers. With the help of the data supplied by pressure groups, the legislators can support the necessary arguments that they can make to enunciate a particular policy. Thus, from a mass of conflicting information and views, the truth can always be discerned.

Thirdly, The supporters behind the relevance of pressure groups also point out that a democracy which permits its citizens to express their varying interests and desires thereby gain a sort of build in' protection against the emergence of single, dominant social force. Businessmen, workers, farmers, social groups, women and religious groups all seek to advance their own interests, but they are forced to compete with one another. The inevitable result is that they balance each other's demands and this countervailing tendency protects the society against the threat that an individual group might come to wield total power of the governance.

Fourthly, pressure groups certainly keep democracy alive during the interval between the elections and constitute a barrier against inter-regnums. They supplement the party system and the formal instruments of government by serving as spokesmen of special interests within society.

Fifthly, pressure groups have become a legislature behind a legislature. By their zeal and enthusiasm, their expertise knowledge and specialized skills, they influence law-making on the floor of the legislatures and in the committee rooms. Pressure groups at-tempt to have their candidates elected. They resort to the help of a party by contributing to its electoral funds and thereby, winning tickets for their favourite parliamentary nominees.

Sixthly, the powers and functions of the government are increasing day by day. The theory of the welfare state and the method of planned development are the new phenomena which have led to an enormous growth of the government power. The ideals and creed of the government to achieve socialism and positivism have further increased their powers considerably such that today we need 'groups' as a shield against the sword wielded by the government.

In short pressure groups are the very name of democracy. They are not absolutely absent in autocracies. In different countries, different factors are responsible for their growing importance. In India, ever-widening activities of government have stimulated the creation and consolidation of groups. In a more general sense, the doctrine of welfare state, globalization of economy and the growth of governmental interference in the economic life of the state today, have all contributed to accelerate the activities of pressure groups than ever before…

PRESSURE GROUP TECHNIQUES

Pressure groups make use of different techniques and methods to achieve their objectives. Some of the most common techniques are as follows:

Firstly, Lobbying is a favourite technique of pressure groups operating in every political system. This is a political technique which means influencing the government. In other words, interested persons making representations to the legislature or other departments of governments in order to influence public policy in favour of themselves may be called lobbying. In fact, the lobbying is the key intermediary between pressure groups and the government. The lobbist actually performs at least three functions vitally important to legislators and executives. He communicates information; he defends the interest of his employers and he defines the political implications of legislative matters.'

Secondly, pressure groups endeavour to secure the nomination and election of sympathetic legislators, who may later be used in the enactment of favourable laws. In modern democracies, in fact legislators often find themselves virtually in the pockets of pres-sure groups. How and why this happens is rather very simple. The legislators, above all, want to maximise the possibilities of their elections; and the election campaign needs money. So, the member is always on the look-out for money, which is available with private association, thus he goes to the associations. In return, he has to support the demands of the association.

Thirdly, pressure groups influence policy-makers by supplying them with accurate data and information. Most of the modern pressure groups now maintain a research cell and come out with effective measures and cures. Thus policies are framed with the help of the information supplied by pressure groups.

Fourthly, sometimes, drafts of bills are framed by pressure groups themselves and submitted to legislatures. They possess skill and expert knowledge in the domain of their own field and have links with Civil Servants. They are conversant with the administrative process and they know how the work can be done,

Fifthly, pressure groups create a favourable climate for their particular cause by appealing to public opinion through speeches, books, pamphlets, special articles, news releases, radios and motion pictures.

Sixthly, pressure groups propagate their viewpoints through the press. They usually try to get the support of the newspapers and even publish their own newspapers. This method is to given the wide publicity to their own views and contrary views are not expressed in a way that they dislike.

Seventhly, pressure groups align them- selves with one or the other political party and act as a powerful clique in the party. If the party is the ruling party, their objectives are achieved without much difficulty.

Eighthly, the mass media constitutes one of the effective channels of access used pressure groups. In an open society the use of the mass media to convey political demand is a major instrument of appealing to political decision-makers.

Ninthly, one obvious means of articulating demands is through physical demonstrations and violence. These methods are employed by generally so called as anomic pressure groups. The use of riots, assassinations and demonstrations by other pressure groups is not an uncommon phenomenon even in India, today.

Tenthly, elite representation on behalf of an interest group constitutes a channel of access which can be utilized with great efficiency by some pressure groups. It may take the form of the presence of a group member in the rule making structure of the government. The agents of interest groups are usually given ample representation on legislative committees in various countries including India as well.

Another well known authority on pressure groups has very rightly commented on the techniques of the pressure groups in the following words:

“An interest group resort to the use of three different techniques in trying to secure its purpose. First, it can try to place in public office persons who are favourably disposed toward the interests it seeks to promote. This technique may be labelled as electioneering. Second, it can try to persuade public officers, whether they are initially favourably disposed toward it or not, to adopt and enforce the policies that it thinks will prove most beneficial to its interests. This technique may be labelled lobbying. Third, it can try to influence public opinion and thereby, gain an indirect influence over government, since government in a democracy is substantially affected by public opinion. This technique may be labelled as propagandizing. From above thus, we can reason out that there are predominantly, three main techniques which are being employed by pressure groups to achieve their specific purposes for which they have come into existence. These are, electioneering, lobbying and propagandizing…

Notwithstanding the above realities, the techniques and functions of pressure groups vary from country to country and from system to system. It must however, be stated that the actual influence of pressure groups in a political system will depend upon the range of activities entrusted to the government. If a government keeps off the economic arena, pressure groups will have little to do, in spite of their skilful techniques. But if the range of activities is wide and the state is a welfare state, committed to socialism and planning, pressure groups will be very active.

Types of Pressure Groups in India:

The post-Independence era of Indian politics witnessed the existence of a large number of active and passive Pressure groups. But on a broader scale of their functioning and constitution, they may broadly be divided into following four categories viz,

• Institutional pressure groups.
• Associational pressure groups.
• Non-Associational pressure groups, and
• Anomic pressure groups.

Classification of Pressure Groups in India:

Institutional pressure groups	Associational pressure groups	Non-Associational pressure groups	Anomic pressure groups
The Congress Working Committee	Trade Union	Communal and Religious groups	ULFA
The Congress Parliamentary Board	Business organizations	Caste Groups	Naxalites
The Chief Minister’s Club	Peasant organizations	Language groups	NayaNirmalSamiti of Gujarat
The Central Election Committee	Student organizations	Gandhian groups	Jammu-Kashmir Liberation Front
Bureaucracy	Government employees Ass. association	Syndicate	All-India Sikh Student’s Federation

Institutional pressure groups

"Institutional interest groups are found within such organizations as political parties, legislatures, armies, bureaucracies and churches. These are formal organizations, composed of professionally employed personnel, with designated political and social functions other than interest articulation. But either as corporate bodies or as small groups within these bodies, these groups may articulate their own interests or represent the interests of other groups in the society. In a developing country, like India, institutional interest groups may occupy, powerful positions in the political system for varied reasons, e.g., (1) possession of an organizational base; (2) existence of a limited number of associational pressure groups or their ineffectiveness in action; (3) because, they are a part and parcel of the governmental process; or (4) because, they represent the interests of varied groups in the society.

The most important pressure groups of this type in India are:

1.         The Congress Working Committee

2.         The Chief Minister’s Club

3.         The Bureaucracy

The CWC as a pressure group: In fact, India for long has been governed by the Congress Party. The Congress evolved from a national movement to a political party and inherited the advantages of an established network of organizational structure evolved during the pre-independence period. Its organizational levels are: Mandel Congress Committee, District Congress Committee, Pradesh Congress Committee, the All India Congress Committee and the Working Committee. Annual sessions of the Congress are the supreme policy-making bodies, and the Working Committee is the executive agency. It is the most powerful and august body, popularly known as the 'Congress High Command'. It represented the national consensus and commanded authority and developed as an instrument of collective Leadership and overshadowed the larger representative body, the All-India Congress Committee (AICC), while the latter often could be 'loved by deviant forces. It was the former which ultimately asserted authority.

Thus, a permanent executive, designed if give strong and continuous direction to Congress activities throughout the country, is provided by the Working Committee. The annual session of the Congress is no more than large and amorphous consultative body, while the AICC, although sometimes restive, normally accepts the policies laid down by the 'Working Committee.

The c.m’s club

The Union of India is comprised of the States and since Independence most of the States had Congress Party government. That is why the Congress Chief Minister played a key role in the decision-making process. The powerful Congress Chief Ministers were always in a position to influence the party and Government at the Centre & interfere in its working. While non-Congress governments were in existence in many of the States (after the 1967 General Elections), the non-Congress Chief Ministers also united to exert influence on the Central government. Now it is a common practice of the State-to maintain liaison officers in Delhi for the protection of the interests of their respective states. By their lobbying activities, these liaison officers may enlighten the Central leaders and the bureaucracy about the need of their States.

The Chief Minister's club as a pressure group played a vital role on several occasions. For instance, Shastri's election for the Prime Ministership was supported by the Chief Ministers. The then Congress President, Kamraj, saw at least ten Chief Ministers and all conveyed the impression of favouringShastri as the prime ministerial candidate. Mrs. Gandhi’s election for Prime Ministership, too, was supported by the Congress Chief Ministers; the Chief Ministers of 10 States or their representatives recommended on 15 January, 1967 in New Delhi that Mrs. Gandhi should be chosen as the leader. The Chief Minister's pressure on MPs was quite apparent. The General Elections were only a year away and the MP's would once again want tickets and thus they could not afford to annoy the Chief Ministers.

Thus in this sense, the 'States' are considered as one of the most important pressure groups. In the allocation of Central projects, the States' pressure has played an important role from the very beginning. The States continued to act a major check on the implementation of the more radical proposals emanating from the Central Government, despite the restoration of strong Central leadership, owing to pressures from the State Chief Ministers. The Central Government could neither reduce ceilings on land holdings nor enact an agricultural income-tax due to the opposition of the Chief Ministers. At the meeting of the Political Affairs Committee of the Cabinet, Chief Ministers of the wheat producing States were invited to discuss the wheat price policy for the year 1972-73. They succeeded in persuading Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her colleagues that any cut in wheat prices would be a politically unwise move.

The bureaucracy

The system of bureaucracy as it exists in India has a continuous history of more than two hundred years. While these hundred years have been revolutionary from the point of view of the country's social, economic and political life, the organization of bureaucracy and the assumptions on which it is based have for the most part remained unaltered even today.

After Independence, the spirit of unionism continued to increase among government employees. Consequently, these associations became quite outspoken in their demands and they began to ventilate their grievances by resort to such means, as public demonstrations, press statements and even threats of direct action. There are at present about 250 recognized associations and fifty or so unrecognized ones in the Central Services. Most of the Civil service associations in India are organized class wise or grade wise. Their membership is deter-mined on the basis of payment of a member-ship fee. The general body of the association meets once in two or three months and exercises all powers. For looking after the day-to-day activities, there are executive committees comprising of a president, a few vice-presidents, a general secretary, a few joint secretaries, a treasurer and a few members, all elected by the general body for one year.

The main objectives of these associations are:

(a)     Securing and promoting the common interests;

(b)     Inculcating in the members, a sense of co-operation

(c)     The maintenance of cordial relations between administration and the employees; and

(d)     To carry on the general welfare activities for their members.

Considering bureaucracy as one of the pressure groups, the most important adjunct of it is the association of IAS officers called as Indian Administrative service Association which is a central association, formed for the purpose of promoting the interests of their own class. Being an all India association, it has branches spread across the country with the similar mandate of promoting their interests.

Under Jawaharlal Nehru, civil servants had a secondary position in policy-making. Since he used to make his own policies in the field of foreign affairs or in domestic affairs, civil servants were only asked - to implement them. The influence and authority of the bureaucracy, however, went on increasing during the Shastri period. Shastri's habit of depending too much on the bureaucracy got a concrete expression in the establishment of a powerful Prime Minister's Secretariat, analogous to the White House Staff of the United States. While the formal functions of the Secretariat involved the preparation 'of important speeches, statements and letters', the office carried ‘the seed of influence’ and recalling the days of the 'steel frame' under the British Raj, demonstrated 'the re-emergence of the civil service as a powerful pressure group on policy.”

 The influence of a senior ICS officers like L.K. Jha increased so much during Shastri’s time that he was came to be seen almost everywhere, whether on Government committees or with foreign delegations led by Shastri or in the company of foreign dignitaries visiting Shastri. In short, Jha had almost become omnipresent. In the words of a renowned journalist, KuldipNayar, "His Secretary, L.K. Jha began having a finger in every pie and came to be called super-Secretary.

Prime Minister's Secretariat was further augmented in technical expertise and thus, became even more strengthened under the regime of Indira Gandhi to the extent that it came to be called as the 'nerve centre of all political and administrative power' in India. Her civil service Secretary, P.N. Haksar had improved on what Jha had done and organized the system in such a way that every-thing would revolve around the Prime Minister's Secretariat. Not even a Deputy Secretary was appointed without its concurrence. He set up a kind of mini-Government. Each officer of the Secretariat dealt exclusively with almost everything in one field, whether economic, foreign or scientific. All ministers took their orders from them.

The Prime Minister's Secretariat had become a kind of cabinet within a cabinet as all decisions are taken at this point and if they are not, there is always a danger that they will be repudiated. Thus, it may safely be said that weak political leadership at the Centre and in the States provided an opportunity for the higher echelons of bureaucracy to increase their range of influence.

Associational pressure groups

Associational pressure groups are the specialized structures for interest articulation, e.g., trade unions, organizations of businessmen or industrialists, ethnic associations, organized by religious denominations and civilian groups. Their particular characteristics are explicit representations of the interests of a particular group, a full-time professional staff and orderly procedures for the formulation of interest and demands. As the importance of associational interest groups has been recognized in a mature political system, they are sometimes considered as the unofficial sources of policy decisions.

Associational interest groups in India are of two types, viz., occupational and community. The occupational groups spring from the modern centers of society, such as industry and the trade unions. The community groups, on the other hand, are based on traditional social structures associated with religion, caste, or language.

The most important associational pressure groups (specific, occupational or community based) insofar as Indian polity is concerned, may be classified into some of the following kinds:

1.      Trade Unions

2.      Business organizations

3.      Peasant organizations

4.      Student organizations and

5.      Government employees associations etc… In order to understand the nature of their working and exerting influence on the policy makers, we shall be delving into the working of some of these only, for the nature of the working of the rest of such groups formally remains to be the same for all practical purposes...

Trade unions as pressure groups: Simply defined, these are voluntary organizations of workers, formed to promote and protect their interests by collective action. Historically, Trade unions began to develop in India towards the end of the First World War. Earlier there were some attempts at organization of workers, but they were of a sporadic character. An organization called the Bombay Mill Hands Association was also established in 1890; but it was more of a welfare organization than a trade union. The situation created in India during the First World War made it necessary for workers to organize themselves. Due to rising prices and the scarcity of essential commodities worker’s conditions were growing miserable. The industrialists were making high profits while the workers had to live in slums and hovels. A number of prominent public men therefore, came forward to help workers in voicing their grievances and building up their organizations. In the initial stages, many leaders of the Indian National congress were prominently associated with trade union movements. The first President of the All India Trade Union Congress, which was established in 1920, was LalaLajpatRai who was at the same time the President of the Indian National Congress. Subsequently, the position was held by the prominent leaders of the Congress, amongst them were Chittranjan Das, Sarojini Naidu, Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhash Chandra Bose.

In 1948, the Congress formed a new organization named, the Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC). With its policy of friendship and sympathy with the Congress and its governments at the Centre and in the States, the INTUC was able to secure some concessions for workers. With a membership of over a million, the INTUC is now the biggest central trade union organizations in the country.

There are thus at present four central-all-India trade union organizations in India – The India National Trade Union Congress (INTUC), the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC), the Hind MazdoorSabha (HMS) and the United Trade Union Congress (UTUC). Though the general objectives of the four organizations are the same, namely, to promote the economic, political, social and cultural interests of workers, they differ on certain fundamental principles based on political attitudes because, somewhere they are known for having their intrinsic affiliations with a particular political party, professing a particular ideology.

A general summary of the trade unions in India reveals that they have exerted little influence on the policies and character of political orgnaisations. They are rather ancillaries of the leading parties for which they seek to extend power and further political aims. Their leadership is in the hands of politicians and not in those of the working classes.

But then, a discernible fact that may not be overlooked is that the trade union movement has already acquired a certain status in the public life of the country. In the Indian labour conferences and in all tripartite bodies it has a status equal to that of employer's organizations. It is consulted by the Central and State Governments on all matters affecting the interests of workers. They have then their spokesmen in Parliament and in State legislatures.

In spite of all these efforts however, trade unions in India are still not in a position to keep an eye on what happens in the Parliament and state legislatures. They do not even endeavour to influence these bodies through their pressure groups and lobbies.

Trade unions have not been effective agents of interest articulation in India. Because of the ready labour supp1ly, from the ranks of the unemployed, the labour movement has been weak and unable to bargain effectively.

Business organizations as pressure groups

Business interests show a much stronger tendency than even the trade unions to form a modern type of pressure group even in India. These associations, representing the business elite in India are far more efficient and rational than might be expected. From the associational point of view, they are expected to advance the desired objectives of Indian businessmen and Indian society as a whole. Business organizations for the purposes of pressure groups in India may be manifested in the form of industrial associations, communal associations, regional organizations, all-India organizations and big business houses, etc.

Some of the most important industrial associations apparently acting as pressure groups in India are: All-India Associations of Industries, Mumbai; All-India Automobile and Ancillary Industries Association, Mumbai; All-India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai; Association of Man-made Fibre Industry, Mumbai; Bihar Industries  Association, Patna; Faridabad Industries Association, Faridabad; Federation of Gujarat Mills and Industries, Mumbai; Federation of Indian Mineral Industries, New Delhi; Madhya Pradesh Organization of Industries, Bhopal; Textile Manufactures' Association, Amritsar, etc. Most of these associations and industries represent the interest of their members.

In short, the Indian business community in India is represented by a multiplicity of associations. These chiefly include, trade and industrial associations, employer associations, and Chamber of Commerce.

The FICCI is one such organization which poses a profound influence on the conditioning of a particular policy of the government is concerned that has a bearing on the business community of India. It is at the same time, the most important in terms of its size, prestige and influence among the apex organizations. With association constituents as well as individual firm members, the FICCI represents some 1, 00,000 firms employing over five million workers. For all its Size however, FICCI involves less than one per cent of all private businessmen in India, because even among those it does present, to the neglect of small and medium trade and industrial interests, the Federation is dominated by big business.

The major targets of the FICCI in its effort to influence public policy, have been the Prime Minister, the cabinet and the upper' echelons of the bureaucracy. By custom, the Prime Minister addresses the Federation's annual meeting in what, in effect, is a dialogue between government and business community. The Federation has gained representation of nearly one hundred Government commissions, committees and councils and maintains continuous contact with various ministries and the bureaucracy. FICCI has refrained from direct involvement in politics, but it has sought aid from government and protection for industry, while protecting regulation, control, and the jungle of licensing procedures.

Business houses and organizations contribute to the funds of political parties and sometimes, finance the election of particular candidates. The big businesses have their alignments with one or the other party. Till 1967, business houses in India subscribed heavily to the Congress party. After the 1967 elections, the Swatantra Party and Jana Sangh also got large funds from these business circles.

It is through informal personal contact that businessmen, as individual and through chambers, most frequently gain access to government and corridors of power. It is through this access, such businessmen and business organizations have eventually achieved what that has been described as “the private understanding between the ruling party and big businesses.” The Birla’s, for example, have commanded a position of such power as to give them a strong voice even in the selection of the Finance Minister.

Although business pressure has sought to shape and modify policy formation, this pressure has been exerted more often by individual businessmen than by organized lobbies, and most frequently, it has been used to bend the administration and implementation of policy rather than to form it. Businessmen however, have not been able to influence substantially the shape and direction of public policy in India.

Govt. Employees associations

Unions of salaried workers and employees now constitute a notable part of the trade union movement. Highly paid employees in banks, in the Life Insurance Corporation and in many other establishments are organized in such a notable form that they manage to exert an influence over the government of the day so as to accede to their demands.

 Some sections of employees in the Railways, the Posts and Telegraphs and medicos are organized on a wide scale. Even Secretariat staff is not averse to adopting trade union methods insofar as the ventilation of their grievances is concerned. Officers of the central Government have formed a confederation of their officers associations. State government employees also have their own organizations to voice their similar grievances against the state government.

These associations are mainly concerned with the employee's problems of status, promotion, emoluments, etc…

Non-Associational Pressure Groups (Informal organizations):

By non-associational interests, we have in mind, kinship, ethnic, regional, religious, and caste groups, which articulate interests informally through individual, cliques, family and religious heads and the like. The distinguishing characteristic of the non-associational interest groups is that in them, the structure of interest articulation is latent and often informal and not visible as in other interest groups.  They have been active in Indian politics since the very beginning. They are known as 'traditional' groups too. Some of the important non-associational groups operating in India, but underneath the surface of India’s political landscape are as below:

1.         Communal and religious groups;

2.         Caste groups, and

3.         The ideological Left and Young Turks.

The communal and religious groups: Communal groups and religious bodies have entered politics as regular political parties in India. The term 'communal' is used for an organization that seeks to promote the interests of a section of the population presumably, to the detriment of the society as a whole. Communal organizations represent narrow ethnic and religious units and endeavours to get better facilities for their respective communities. Among such groups found quite active in India are, the RashtriyaSwayamSevaSangh(RSS), the VHP, the Jamat-e-Islam-i-Hind, and the Jamat-e-Islam and the recently emerged, the SIMI etc.

 The RSS may be said to be a pressure group in relation to the BJP. On certain occasions, the RSS forced even the Government to accept its demands. At one of time, the RSS had blocked the induction of Jaswant Singh and PramodMahajan into the Union Cabinet in March 1998.  The senior RSS leaders like DattopantThengadi and K. Sudarshan were furious with both Vajpayee and Advani for sacrificing swadeshi at the altar of expediency over the IRA Bill. Leading a BMS rally on Delhi’s Parliament Street, Thengadi's public admonishment of Vajpayee reflected the anger in the RSS over the BJP for reversing the SanghParivar's avowed economic policies. "The SanghParivar has launched an open assault against the Prime Minister demanding a rollback of economic reforms and firm handling of Pakistan." The Jamat-ul-Ulema and the Jamat-e-Islam are the main Muslim communal groups. Their main objective is analogous to any other Hindu communal organization that is to protect the rights and the interests of the Muslims.

The ideological Left and Young Turks: These may certainly be described as a new pressure group in relation to the Congress Party and the Government. Ideological Left in the Congress Party was influencing the policy decisions of vital significance. They were critical of the pro-capital economic policies of the Government. The Congress Party had adopted socialistic resolutions since long particularly, at its Avadi session way back in 1955. But they were effectively implemented only after the 1969 split of the congress party. For this, credit goes to the Young Turks. The following decisions immediately thereafter, were taken by the Government under its pressure:

(a)     Nationalisation of banks;

(b)    Abolition of Privy Purses and princely privileges;

(c)     Nationalisation of general insurance;

(d)     Land ceiling and ceiling of urban property;

(e)    Nationalisation of wheat trade; and

(f)      24th, 25th and 29th Amendments of the Constitution.

The left-oriented groups of this type were vigorously moulding the policies and decisions of the Congress Party and ultimately of the Congress Government.

Anomic pressure groups

Anomic pressure groups are the characteristic feature of several developing countries and it is not a new phenomenon in Indian politics. By anomic pressure groups we mean more or less a spontaneous breakthrough into the political system from the society, such as riots, demonstrations assassinations and the like. Thus use of violence and some radical extra-constitutional means by the organized groups is known as anomic behaviour. There are as many as fifty or more different forms of anomic protests and direct action that have been resorted to, and yet there may be no end to the variety of these techniques. These include small public meetings, postering, submitting memoranda, press statements, street corner meetings, long marches on foot, mass rallies, processions, celebrating protest days, mass deputations, torchlight procession, hartals, strikes, picketing, satyagrah, ,dharnas, fasting, self-immolation, destruction of public property, holding up of public transport, uprooting of railway tracks, dislocating telephone and telegraph wires, burning of Government buildings, gherao, go-slow or work-to-rule, mass casual  leave, riots, looting of public or private property, etc. To this list we can add a few more forms of public protests, e.g., walk out from the legislature, general strike, organizing `morchas', jathas', threats, burning of effigies and organizing senas etc. These are all described as the anomic phenomena in the society.

 Though superficially divergent, they share in common at least two features:

First, they are an eloquent expression of impatience with the style and the working of the government of the day; and

Secondly, they all seek to influence the contents of 'output' functions of the Government in terms of its functions of  rule-making, rule application and rule adjudication such that in the process of their working, they become one of the 'inputs' of the political system of land.

In' India, it is generally believed, because the Government is irresponsive, political parties incapable of adequately aggregating the interest demands of all sections of the population that anomic pressure have come to  appear on the scene. In other words, the violent form of public protests result from the failure of peaceful public protests to even attract the attention of the government.

Salient features of the indian model of pressure groups

After a critical analysis of the nature and role of pressure groups in Indian politics, one easily comes to the conclusion that politics in India is pre-eminently the politics of pressure groups rather than the politics of parties. A new type of pressure group model with its own distinctive features is in the process of making and that, too, is somewhat unique and different from the Western model of pressure groups. The specific features of the Indian model of pressure group can be summarized as below:

Firstly, the traditional pressure groups like caste, community, religion and regional are the determinants of politics in India. Evidence has been cited from the behaviour of political parties, all of which invoke primordial sentiments and organize their support on the basis of caste and communal identities. The caste groups in India may still be called 'sovereigns without crowns'.

Secondly, most of' the associational groups like trade unions, student organizations, peasant organizations, etc., are dominated and controlled by political parties. They may be called 'parties behind the parties'. It is a noteworthy feature that major business associations are free from party control.

Thirdly, in the beginning say, until the split of the congress party in 1969, the organized pressure groups had little impact on the formation of public policy. In other words, their influence was almost negative. The reasons were mainly two: (1) charismatic leadership at the Centre and in the States; and (2) monopoly of the Congress Party in the governmental structure.

 As the influence of the leadership declined and the Congress monopoly was broken, the role of pressure groups greatly increased. In the early years of Independence, their influence had been directed towards preventing the Government from pursuing some course of action. For example, organized lobbies prevented nationalization of rice trade and opposed nationalization of other food grains, including wheat. At the State level, the farmer lobby within the ruling party prevented an increase in land taxes. Now it is observed that some of the major groups are assisting the Government in framing the rules and regulations for their concern. For instance, the wheat policy of the Government framed in March 1974 was chalked out with the positive support and consent of the All-India Food grain Dealer's Association.

Fourthly, the Constitution under Articles 262 and 263 makes provision for the Central Parliament to settle border disputes and inter-State water disputes wherein, the members of interested States get an opportunity of playing the role of pressure groups effectively. It must also be remembered in this connection that almost all the States maintain liaison officers in Delhi to maintain contacts with the representatives in Parliament for the purpose of intensive lobbying whenever such questions come up for discussion.

Fifthly, in the period of coalition and non-Congress Governments in the Indian States in the late 1960s, a few State Governments encouraged organized groups to enlist their support against the Centre. Demands like establishment of more universities, greater investment by the Centre in States, location of steel plants and refineries etc, are always supported by these groups whenever such a situation arises.

Sixthly, institutional pressure groups the political parties have created a chaos in the Indian party system as a whole. The existing groups in the ruling party as well those in the opposition parties have threatened the very stability of the existing majority governments. The Groups in the parties are struggling for power for their narrow and parochial interests.

Seventhly, India heavily depends upon foreign aid and technical skill. Consequently, foreign lobbies are in a position to influence nation's domestic and foreign policies as happened in the recent past when some of the latent foreign lobbies were found to foment the protest against the commissioning of India’s fourth generation nuclear reactor at Kundalkulam in Tamil Nadu.

Eighthly, mass movements, rallies strikes and sometimes, even mass violence and upsurge have become the instruments being used by anomic or associational groups to press their demands in India.

Ninthly, the general outlook in India towards pressure groups is a critical one. It is considered improper that interests should guide policy formulation because it is felt that once the Government succumbs to the pressure of such organized groups then no decision will be taken in the public interest, and 

Lastly, after the Fourth General Elections of 1967, most groups, however, adopted a neutral attitude towards the political parties. They realized that if they identify themselves more with the Congress Party, they may lose their influence on the Government once the other political party comes to power. Even among the committed groups, the tendency now is to rely less on party connections and more on governmental consultations no matter, which political party is in power in order to safeguard their interests. Thus, the trade unions and the business groups rely more on confidential consultations with the Government now than in their connections with the Congress and other political parties.