The Vadra effect

Emotional evasions from Priyanka Gandhi are not enough

For someone who is campaigning in only two constituencies, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra has certainly achieved quite an effect. Her sniper shots from Amethi and Rae Bareli about the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP's) prime ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, have caused that party's campaign to wheel itself around, like a heavy tank, to fire in her direction. Perhaps the BJP would have been better served ignoring Ms Gandhi. But a campaign that lives by television news will always fear dying by television news - and Ms Gandhi's barbs were attracting entirely too much attention in the studios of New Delhi for the BJP's comfort.

The BJP, in its return salvo, released a well-produced video and a six-page booklet - so well produced that, in fact, the party might well have been holding it in reserve for just such an eventuality - on the controversial land deals of Ms Gandhi's husband, Robert Vadra. This has additional resonance for the BJP because Ms Gandhi's brother, Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi, has recently begun attacking the transfer and sale of land in Gujarat to various industrial houses by the Narendra Modi administration. The BJP's argument is not a new one; it has been in the public domain for some time, and has been articulated by Arvind Kejriwal, among others. It is that Mr Vadra used his connections to grow his wealth vastly through clever land deals. In Haryana, Mr Vadra benefited from a legal change in status of panchayat land, which he bought and resold to developers at a vast profit. In Rajasthan, Mr Vadra bought land around electricity sub-stations that private solar power producers subsequently had to buy from him.

There are also charges against Mr Vadra that he may have benefited, in the Rajasthan case, at least, from insider information about policy changes to help the solar power sector. But the BJP has now been in power in Rajasthan for months, and has failed to pursue the case, indicating it is unlikely that any prima facie indication of criminality exists. However, the court of public opinion is quite a different thing. Mr Vadra has maintained silence since these charges have been levelled against him by political parties. And the truth is that Ms Gandhi's emotional response to the accusations against her husband - that she is hurt, and that she doesn't know what to tell the children - is rightly seen as an evasion. Such a response is hardly adequate and she should explain with credible evidence if her husband is not guilty of the charges levelled against him. The Congress' "saviour", as some are seeing Ms Gandhi, seems to have less substance than the existing heir. In the past, the party's president and vice-president have avoided discussing Mr Vadra, but the renewed prominence of Priyanka Gandhi means the party and its leaders cannot avoid the strong whiff of disrepute attached to his dealings. The country will expect a clearer explanation of why Mr Vadra chose to make his deals and what he knew; as well as a promise of a full, transparent investigation into possible collusion by government servants.