After six consecutive days of disruptions that paralyzed parliamentary proceedings, the Congress finally yielded on Tuesday, paving the way for some business to be conducted during the winter session of Parliament. The stalemate, centered around the Congress’s protests against the alleged indictment of the Adani Group in the United States, highlighted significant tensions within the Opposition alliance and even within Congress’s own ranks. These internal and external pressures ultimately forced the party to reassess its approach, allowing the House to function for the first time in this session.
The Congress’s initial strategy revolved around targeting the BJP government over reports that Adani Group Chairman Gautam Adani, along with associates, was indicted in the U.S. for allegedly bribing Indian officials to secure solar energy contracts. This approach was championed by Rahul Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, who had set a confrontational tone as early as November 21. However, this singular focus on the Adani issue soon created fissures within the INDIA bloc—a coalition of Opposition parties—as well as dissatisfaction among Congress MPs, particularly those from the Lok Sabha.
Within the INDIA bloc, key allies like the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and the Samajwadi Party (SP) expressed their discontent with Congress’s strategy. The TMC emphasized that issues such as inflation, unemployment, fertilizer shortages, and fiscal discrimination against Opposition-ruled states were more urgent and relevant for parliamentary debate. Similarly, the SP sought attention on the Sambhal incident, where a controversial mosque survey had sparked tensions and resulted in fatalities. Both parties skipped Congress-led protests on Tuesday, underscoring a growing divergence within the bloc.
The Left parties also voiced concerns, suggesting that Congress’s disruptive tactics were counterproductive. During Opposition meetings, Left leaders argued that the relentless focus on Adani was failing to resonate with the public and that a broader range of issues needed to be prioritized. This sentiment found support within the Congress itself, particularly among its Lok Sabha MPs, who felt increasingly sidelined by the party’s upper house leadership. These MPs, buoyed by Congress’s improved tally in the 2024 general election—from 52 seats in 2019 to 99—argued for a more constructive approach, highlighting their accountability to voters compared to unelected Rajya Sabha members.
The turning point came when Speaker Om Birla convened a meeting to break the deadlock. The Congress, under pressure from its allies and its own members, agreed to a compromise: a two-day special debate on the Constitution to mark its 75th anniversary of adoption. Scheduled for December 13-14 in the Lok Sabha and December 16-17 in the Rajya Sabha, the debate was envisioned as a platform to address a range of issues, including but not limited to the Adani allegations. This agreement allowed Congress to save face while enabling parliamentary business to proceed.
Congress leaders, including Jairam Ramesh and Manickam Tagore, expressed cautious optimism about the way forward. Ramesh announced that both Rahul Gandhi and party president Mallikarjun Kharge had requested the Constitution debate, framing it as a constructive move that could encompass diverse concerns, including the Adani matter. Tagore, meanwhile, reiterated Congress’s commitment to raising the Adani issue through planned protests but assured that these would not disrupt proceedings. This strategic pivot was aimed at demonstrating Congress’s commitment to governance while maintaining its critical stance against the BJP.
However, the disunity within the Opposition bloc remained evident. TMC and SP MPs, for instance, did not participate in Tuesday’s protest, signaling their dissatisfaction with Congress’s leadership. While Tagore claimed that all INDIA bloc allies, except the TMC, had endorsed the focus on Adani, the reality of divergent priorities within the alliance was apparent. The SP prioritized the Sambhal issue, with party chief Akhilesh Yadav raising it during Tuesday’s proceedings, while the TMC focused on its five identified issues, including Manipur and fiscal matters.
The broader implications of the Congress’s initial intransigence and eventual compromise are significant. The winter session’s rocky start underscored the challenges of managing a coalition as ideologically and politically diverse as the INDIA bloc. For Congress, the episode revealed the limits of single-issue politics, particularly when such an issue fails to gain traction among both allies and the public. By recalibrating its strategy to include a broader agenda, the party sought to balance its leadership aspirations within the Opposition with the need to maintain unity among its partners.
The decision to allow Parliament to function also highlighted the growing assertiveness of Congress’s Lok Sabha MPs, who are increasingly shaping the party’s parliamentary strategy. Their insistence on addressing voters’ concerns reflects a broader shift within the party toward greater responsiveness and accountability. For the INDIA bloc, the episode serves as a reminder of the complexities of coalition politics, where consensus-building is as critical as confronting the ruling party.
Ultimately, the Congress’s decision to step back from its hardline stance was driven by a combination of internal dissent, ally dissatisfaction, and the realization that its strategy was not yielding the desired results. While the party remains committed to raising the Adani issue, its willingness to compromise marks a pragmatic turn, signaling its readiness to engage in substantive parliamentary debates and to prioritize governance over grandstanding. Whether this shift will enhance the INDIA bloc’s cohesion or merely expose its underlying tensions remains to be seen. For now, however, the resumption of parliamentary business is a small but significant victory for the democratic process.
