The process of baseless allegations made by opposition parties in Indian politics and later sought forgiveness is no longer new. In this connection, the latest case of Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Saket Gokhale is in the discussion, who has apologized public and unconditionally for the false allegations made in 2021 against former diplomat Lakshmi Murdarawar Puri. The Delhi High Court gave strict instructions that if Saket Gokhale did not apologize on time, he would face civil detention. Along with this, the court also ordered to pay a compensation of Rs 50 lakh and stopped Gokhale from making any derogatory remarks against Puri in future.
Repeated opposition’s old ‘apology playbook’ repeatedly
But this case is not alone. This has been the strategy of the Congress and other opposition leaders over the years – making controversial statements without confirmation, making media headlines, and when the court or law tightens the laws of the law, then he will get rid of apologizing. Be it Congress leader Rahul Gandhi or Digvijay Singh-this ‘allegation, commotion, then apologize’ playbook has been used again and again. In 2014, Rahul Gandhi raised a controversy by accusing the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) of killing Mahatma Gandhi. When the matter reached the Supreme Court, he shocked the statement and said that his comment was not the organization but “individuals” associated with it. It was not the first time Rahul had to withdraw his statement.
‘Blood brokerage’ controversy and U-turn
After the Uri attack in 2016, Rahul Gandhi faced a nationwide criticism by accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi of ‘blood brokerage’ on the surgical strikes conducted by the Indian Army. Later, when there was public anger across the country, Rahul had to support the army and clarify that his target was on those who took political advantage and not on the army.
‘Chowkidar Chor’ comment in Rafael deal
In the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, Rahul Gandhi misunderstood the Supreme Court’s decision, gave the slogan of ‘Chowkidar Chor Hai’ on Prime Minister Modi. When the court sent a contempt notice, Rahul had to apologize unconditionally in writing and admitted that he had said so in “political heat”.
Examples of Mani Shankar Iyer, Jairam Ramesh and Digvijay Singh
Not only Rahul Gandhi, senior Congress leaders also became victims of this playbook. In 2017, Mani Shankar Iyer raised a controversy by calling Prime Minister Modi a ‘lowly man’. The Congress party had to apologize publicly and Iyer was suspended. Iyer later clarified that he meant “poor behavior”, but by then political losses had been done. Jairam Ramesh accused Vivek Doval, son of National Security Advisor Ajit Doval in 2019 of financial disturbances without confirmation. When Doval filed a defamation suit, Ramesh had to apologize in writing and admit that he did not investigate the facts. Aam Aadmi Party leader Sanjay Singh falsely accused Ankit Bhardwaj, a young member of BJP, that he attacked AAP leader Kapil Mishra. Later the matter turned out to be wrong and Sanjay Singh had to publicly apologize. Digvijay Singh also did not remain untouched by this. In 2023, he gave RSS thinker M.S. A false statement about Golwalkar was made on social media, after which the case reached the court. In 2024, the court ordered him to apologize.
‘Gandhi does not apologize’ – Where did that claim?
In an interview in 2014, Rahul Gandhi proudly said that “Gandhi does not apologize.” But the incidents of repeatedly apologizing in the court over the years have proved this claim hollow. Saket Gokhale’s recent apology is a small part of this broad trend – sensational statement of confirmation, uproar in the media, and then forgiveness under legal pressure.
When is the end of this ‘apology playbook’?
The question arises that how long will the opposition parties continue to resort to this strategy? Every time making unrestrained allegations in front of the public, taking political advantage and later bending to court is not only harming their credibility but also hurting the public’s trust. Is the opposition responsible in Indian democracy only makes the meaning of accusing and subsequently apologizing? Ban on this trend has become a demand for times, otherwise the trust of the public will gradually rise from all political institutions. From Saket Gokhale to Rahul Gandhi and Digvijay Singh – it is clear from all these matters that some leaders of the opposition make rhetoric without proof for political gains. But they have to bend again and again in front of the court and the law. The question is, will the politics of ‘allegations-gift demand’ go on in the future or will the people answer it through their vote? These incidents not only expose the opposition’s strategy but also underline the importance of accountability and credibility in Indian politics.
