The Waqf flip and a BJD rift

While the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025, has triggered nationwide protests, in Odisha it has laid bare deep fault lines within the Biju Janata Dal (BJD). Senior leaders questioned the sudden directive allowing the party’s Rajya Sabha members to vote according to their conscience on the contentious Bill, and BJD supremo Naveen Patnaik was found on the back foot for the first time. They demanded to know who authored such a directive, which tarnished the party’s `secular’ image.

As they sought to know who was behind the last-minute change in the party’s stand that compromised its core ideology, the anger poured on to the doorsteps of Naveen Niwas, the former Chief Minister’s residence and the nerve centre of BJD activities. The `Pandian go back’ slogans that rent the air made it clear that the ire was directed at the bureaucrat-turned-politician V K Pandian. Embarrassed by the public outcry and the ensuing infighting between anti- and pro-Pandian factions, Patnaik intervened. He urged party members to withdraw their protests, praising Pandian’s contributions to the party.

Despite claims that Pandian has taken `political sanyas’ following the party’s 2024 poll defeat, he remains as influential as ever. Squarely blamed by a majority of partymen for the fall of BJD because of his `overbearing visibility’ during the last election campaign and too much interference in the administration, he continues to be criticised by the rank and file of the party. An interesting fact is his visibility in public is practically zero now.

The BJD has been perceived as a party where any kind of dissension is crushed ruthlessly. To use a cliché, for Naveen, it is either his way or the highway. Perpetually under the threat of getting punished, its members, including the seniors, have always tread carefully when it came to voicing their dissent on any subject. Therefore, the democratic fabric is practically non-existent in BJD, like any other regional outfit. It has always been a one-man show and still is, despite the drubbing it suffered after 24 years of continuous rule in the state. Almost 10 months after it was thrown out of power, there seem to be no course correction measures for its revival, while the restive senior leaders are seen struggling to fend for themselves against a brigade of younger elements in the party who have become the voice of the powers that be.

Two of Patnaik’s loyalists, Debasish Samantrai and Munna Khan, both Rajya Sabha MPs, have openly claimed that the party chief had categorically stated in the parliamentary committee meeting that the BJD would oppose the Waqf Bill. What prompted the party’s volte-face was what they demanded to know. Many wonder that the duo could not have gone this far without the boss’s nod. On the other hand, even if Pandian was behind the direction to the MPs to use their conscience during the voting on the Waqf Bill as alleged by some, he could not have done this without Naveen’s nod. Was it then a well-thought-out ploy? Possibly yes. Running with the hare and hunting with the hounds could prove to be the best policy for Patnaik to keep everybody under a tight leash.

Patnaik’s intervention to douse the anger of those who vociferously pursued the Waqf Bill fracas may have pushed the matter to the back burner, but all is still not well in BJD. An atmosphere of suspicion and a standoff between anti- and pro-Pandian factions continue even after Patnaik was re-elected as the party president for the ninth time on the trot on Saturday last. There is a tussle going on within the party over the organisational restructuring, including the finalisation of the 81-member state executive. A core group of leaders perceived to be close to Patnaik and Pandian is reported to be active in creating a schism to sideline a section of the old guard.

While the party is beset with a serious problem of factionalism, Naveen Patnaik’s call for creating a strong social media presence about BJD’s pro-people activity to counter the `false narrative’ of BJP may not bear fruit. The foremost task for him, therefore, is to keep the organisation together with a judicious move to regain the trust of all.

(The writer is an Odisha-based journalist)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.