In an incisive and evocative debut speech in the Lok Sabha, Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra sought to re-anchor India’s democratic journey in the founding principles of its Constitution. Her nearly 40-minute address was more than a political critique; it was an impassioned invocation of India’s civilisational ethos of dialogue, inclusivity, and fearless debate.
“Our Constitution,” she declared, “is not just a document but a torch burning in the hearts of every Indian, giving them the right to justice, equality and expression.” She passionately emphasised that the Constitution empowers citizens to hold governments accountable, to demand justice, and to dream of a better future.
Priyanka’s assertion that “a blanket of fear has shrouded the country” under BJP rule over the past decade is a pointed reminder of this perceived shift towards authoritarianism.
Speaking as the first Opposition voice in the two-day discussion on the Constitution’s 75-year journey, she seized the opportunity to juxtapose the inclusive ideals of the Constitution with what she described as the exclusivist tendencies of the BJP.
“The Samvidhan was not ‘Sangh ka Vidhaan’,” Priyanka remarked, delivering one of the most striking lines of her speech. In these words, she drew an unambiguous line between the Constitution, which she argued belongs to all Indians, and the ideological framework of the RSS, the BJP’s parent organisation. The insinuation was clear: the Constitution reflects a collective spirit, whereas the RSS represents a narrower vision.
Priyanka’s rhetoric on fear is equally layered. “The nature of fear is such that it has now afflicted the ruling party too,” she stated, a claim that seems to suggest the BJP’s defensiveness in facing parliamentary scrutiny. This was not merely an attack on the BJP’s policies but a critique of its approach to governance—a style that, in her view, prioritises control over accountability.
As she addressed the BJP’s alleged reluctance to face questioning, she observed, “It has prompted them to run away from answering questions in the Parliament.”