AMMA's first women-led EC showed trailer for change, ended in chaotic climax

Nine months ago, the mood inside AMMA was one of optimism. When Shwetha Menon was elected president and Cuckoo Parameswaran became general secretary on August 15, 2025, the Association of Malayalam Movie Artists appeared to be entering a new chapter. For the first time in its history, two women occupied the organisation's top positions. The symbolism was difficult to ignore. After years of controversy and criticism, particularly in the aftermath of the Hema Committee report and the resignation of the previous Mohanlal-led executive committee, AMMA seemed eager to project renewal.

The images from that election day reflected that hope. Rival presidential candidates Shwetha Menon and Devan embraced after a closely fought contest. "If Shwetha is AMMA's mother, then I am AMMA's father," Devan famously remarked. Members congratulated one another. The election was presented as a fresh start.

Less than a year later, that executive committee has resigned in its entirety.

The dramatic exit following Sunday's annual general body meeting was not the result of one explosive incident. It was the culmination of months of accumulating tensions, unresolved disputes and an apparent breakdown of trust within the organisation. The resignation is significant not because an executive committee stepped down, but because it raises uncomfortable questions about whether AMMA's problems are deeper than any individual leadership team.

The first warning signs emerged not through public confrontations but through administrative disputes.
The controversy surrounding office manager Athulya became an early test of the new leadership's ability to manage conflict. What began as a termination escalated into a workplace harassment complaint against senior office-bearers. The eventual decision to revoke the termination and place treasurer Unni Sivapal on compulsory leave suggested that the issue had evolved beyond a routine workplace disagreement. It exposed concerns about accountability, decision-making and internal processes.

For many members, the dispute became less about one employee and more about whether the organisation had clear systems for handling grievances.

That question would surface repeatedly over the following months.
The deeper crisis, however, was unfolding within the executive committee itself.
Organisations can survive disagreements. What they struggle to survive is when those disagreements become public accusations between people entrusted with running the institution.

Ansiba Hassan's resignation as joint secretary became a turning point. Her allegations against fellow executive committee member Tiny Tom and her criticism of how complaints were handled suggested that the conflicts were no longer confined to private discussions. The subsequent dispute involving vice-president Lakshmipriya only reinforced the impression that internal relationships had deteriorated significantly.

Neena Kurup's allegations against Tiny Tom added another layer to the crisis.

Taken individually, each complaint represented a dispute between members. Collectively, they painted a picture of an executive committee increasingly consumed by internal conflict. The issue was not merely that complaints existed. It was that the leadership appeared unable to contain them within institutional mechanisms before they spilled into the public sphere.

In many ways, this became AMMA's biggest challenge.

The organisation has historically functioned through relationships, influence and the stature of senior members. When consensus exists, that model works. When disagreements emerge, however, institutions require processes that are trusted by everyone involved. Over the past year, that trust appeared to weaken.

Even Shwetha Menon's own remarks reflected this reality.

Her acknowledgment of a communication gap within the organisation and her suggestion that gender dynamics influenced how her leadership was received pointed to another important dimension of the crisis. Whether members agreed with her assessment or not, her comments highlighted the difficulties of leading an organisation where authority is often shaped as much by personalities and informal power structures as by elected positions.

That context is important because the Shwetha-Cuckoo administration was never viewed as just another executive committee.
It carried expectations of change.
The election of two women to the organisation's highest offices was seen by many as a symbolic break from the past. Expectations were naturally higher. Members wanted not only a new leadership team but a different style of leadership.

Yet symbolism alone cannot overcome structural weaknesses.

If anything, the events of the past nine months suggest that AMMA's challenges are larger than questions of who occupies the top posts. Administrative disputes, communication failures, financial concerns and factional disagreements would have tested any leadership team.
The issue that ultimately appears to have united many dissatisfied members was financial transparency.

Concerns surrounding accounts and the absence of a financial audit report became a major point of contention ahead of the general body meeting. Financial disputes are often the most damaging conflicts within member-driven organisations because they strike at the foundation of trust.

The audit issue therefore became more than an accounting matter. It became a symbol of wider dissatisfaction with the organisation's functioning.

By the time the general body convened, the meeting was carrying the weight of months of unresolved tensions. The reported no-confidence motion was not the beginning of the crisis. It was the formal expression of frustrations that had been building for some time.

That helps explain why Sunday's developments felt less like a sudden collapse and more like an inevitable conclusion.

The formation of an ad hoc committee may provide temporary stability. Administratively, it ensures that the organisation can continue functioning while members determine the next course of action.
But the larger challenge remains.

AMMA now faces a credibility test. Members will have to decide whether the problems of the past year were specific to one executive committee or whether they reveal institutional weaknesses that have been ignored for too long. If it is the latter, simply electing a new leadership team may not be enough.

The story of the Shwetha Menon-led committee began with a promise of renewal. Its abrupt end does not necessarily invalidate that promise. But it does suggest that reform in AMMA will require more than new faces, historic milestones or symbolic victories.