�Bhubaneswar: The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) led by Odisha’s former Odisha chief minister Naveen Patnaik is now facing a critical juncture, especially as it fails to cope with the new realities that follow its unexpected defeat to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in assembly elections held early this year.
With a political dominance that spanned more than 24 years, the party is now dealing with not only external pressures but also internal dissent, threatening its cohesion and future.
A significant point of contention is the leadership of Naveen Patnaik, who had long been the face of the party’s success. However, after this electoral debacle, senior leaders like Amar Prasad Satpathy have publicly demanded that Patnaik take responsibility for the party’s failures, as he had once done for its victories. This shift in tone signals that Patnaik’s once unquestioned authority is now being challenged.
The criticisms extend beyond election strategy to Patnaik's management of internal party affairs. Leaders have raised concerns over his disengagement and reliance on his aide, V Karthikeyan Pandian, whose influence has become a divisive issue. While Pandian wielded significant power during the BJD's time in office, his leadership in party matters is being openly questioned, leading to frustrations that he has eclipsed even the party's elected officials in decision-making.
The public discontent has exposed deep-rooted issues within the BJD’s organisational structure. Senior figures like Sambit Routray and others are speaking out about the need for structural reviews and more hands-on leadership from Patnaik himself if the party is to recover.
The recent electoral loss to the BJP is not the only issue plaguing the BJD. Internal resignations, like that of Prakash Behera as well as preceding two Rajya Sabha members — Mamata Mohanta and Sujit Kumar, and public critiques from senior leaders suggest the party is struggling with deeper issues of leadership and direction. Behera’s departure, citing dissatisfaction with the party's functioning, adds to the chorus of voices calling for changes in how the BJD is managed.
The public airing of grievances, which once would have been unthinkable in Patnaik’s tightly controlled party, has become more frequent. These challenges come at a pivotal moment, as the BJD seeks to rebuild after its dramatic loss. For a party that once prided itself on its unity, these fissures indicate a more profound crisis that extends beyond electoral performance.
The growing calls for accountability from Naveen Patnaik, according to political analyst Prasanna Mohanty, signal that the BJD’s leadership structure, which heavily relies on a single figure, is under strain.
“The BJD now faces the dual challenge of addressing internal dissent and external competition from the BJP. If the party fails to reform its organisational strategy and leadership approach, it risks losing further ground in Odisha’s political arena. Both the internal critiques of leadership and the resignation of key members reveal a party in turmoil. Naveen Patnaik's leadership, once the cornerstone of BJD’s success, is now being called into question as dissenting voices demand accountability and reform. How Patnaik responds to these challenges will shape not only the future of the BJD but also the political landscape of Odisha,” added Mohanty.
