Keeping pressure on AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami, senior party leaders and former Ministers S.P. Velumani and Natham R. Viswanathan have opposed the removal of “more than 400 members” of the party general council and executive committee.

They have also called for re-induction of the party’s former interim general secretary, V.K. Sasikala, and the former deputy general secretary, T.T.V. Dhinakaran, into the AIADMK. Among other charges, they said Mr. Palaniswami “did not use the opportunity to have an alliance with the TVK”.

An undated, four-page letter lays bare the internal affairs of the party since the 2021 Assembly election, listed the instances of possible alliances, including those with the BJP and the TVK, having failed to materialise, and pinned the blame on Mr. Palaniswami’s leadership and handling of the party matters. The letter, meant for the “notice of the party general secretary”, was signed by Mr. Velumani and Mr. Viswanathan.

“You have so far removed over 400 members of the party’s general council and executive committee so that none should express any view contrary to yours,” said the letter, which surfaced days after Mr. Velumani and others called on TVK general secretary and Minister N. Anand.

Even after the party started losing strengthen since the 2026 Assembly election, functionaries who were discharging their duties efficiently in Coimbatore, Tiruppur, The Nilgiris, Cuddalore, Kallakurichi, Tiruchi, Thanjavur, Tenkasi, Villupuram, Tirupattur, Dharmapuri, Namakkal, Karur, Pudukkottai, and Perambalur were being removed from their posts, they said. “This is not acceptable. It will only weaken the party.”

The functionaries who were divested of the party membership were part of the AIADMK since its inception in 1972 and instrumental in maintaining the party’s electoral prospects thus far, they stressed. “The actions of the general secretary, which overlook their contributions to the party and weaken the party, should not continue. In the interest of the party, those who were removed should be given back their original positions,” they said. Party functionaries were to be elected to local bodies, which was quite important, they said. “We need to strengthen the party for this.”

"The actions of the general secretary, which overlook their contributions to the party and weaken the party, should not continue. In the interest of the party, those who were removed should be given back their original positions," they said. Party functionaries were to be elected to local bodies, which was quite important, they said. "We need to strengthen the party for this."

Amit Shah’s proposal

The AIADMK lost the electoral prospects in 42 constituencies in the 2021 Assembly election only because Mr. Palaniswami “disregarded” the proposal made by BJP leader and Union Minister Amit Shah to forge an alliance with Mr. Dhinakaran, which was accepted by former Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam, they said. “You denied a seat to TTV [Mr. Dhinakaran]. You did not embrace the DMDK, the Puthiya Thamizhagam, and Mr. Sarath Kumar (who were with us from 2019) and let them go in the 2021 Assembly election.”

Even after the BJP’s national leadership attempted repeatedly to forge an alliance by promising that all our demands would be fulfilled, “you acted arbitrarily and without thoughtfulness”, which led to the DMK-Congress alliance securing all the 40 seats [in the last Lok Sabha election], they said. Due to Mr. Palaniswami’s “wrong decision”, the party candidates were pushed to the third position and “lost several crores of rupees”.

When the PMK agreed to be part of the alliance for the Lok Sabha election, “we lost that party as an ally because we did not confirm the alliance for over a month,” they said, adding, “You arbitrarily rejected the alliance with the BJP and the PMK, which were looking to form an alliance with us.” Even in the 2026 Assembly election, “you arbitrarily rejected the alliance proposed by the DMDK and the Puthiya Thamizhagam”. After the 2026 Assembly election, 25 of the 46 AIADMK MLAs were “forced” to take a stand because of Mr. Palaniswami’s “wrong decisions”.

Despite its bright prospects, the AIADMK lost in the 2021 and 2026 Assembly elections and the 2024 Lok Sabha election owing to the “arbitrary and wrong decisions” of Mr. Palaniswami, they said. The party functionaries were disheartened by them. Many senior functionaries could not tolerate “your holding talks with the DMK with selfishness” and were joining other parties in groups, they added.

The leaders also questioned why key functionaries who had been discharging their duties efficiently were being removed from their posts. They further called for “Marappom, Mannippom [Let us forget, let us forgive]” and demanded that the party positions be given back to those who had been removed since May 13, 2026. Mr. Palaniswami should come forward to give them back their posts so as to strengthen the party.

Krishnamurthy defends Palaniswami

AIADMK whip in the Assembly Agri S.S. Krishnamurthy said Mr. Palaniswami was not responsible for the poor performance of the party in the 2026 Assembly election as candidates were shortlisted by the respective district secretaries.

Addressing journalists in Tiruvannamalai, Mr. Krishnamurthy said, “The AIADMK district secretaries act as “feudal lords” in their respective regions. The party leadership merely announced the candidates recommended by the respective district secretaries. Who has to take responsibility for the party’s poor performance? Those district secretaries should take moral responsibility and resign,” he said.

Mr. Krishnamurthy said the candidates recommended by Mr. Velumani and Mr. Viswanathan, both of whom were then district secretaries, in Coimbatore, The Nilgiris, Villupuram, Dindigul, and Tiruppur districts were (mostly) defeated. “They [Mr. Viswanathan and Mr. Velumani] should be grateful to Mr. Palaniswami for giving them coveted posts in the party. They were merely district secretaries when Jayalalithaa was the general secretary,” he said.

Jayalalithaa was known to select candidates directly, he said, adding that she took moral responsibility for the party’s rout in the 1996 election.