Why TMC revolt is about Abhishek Banerjee, not Mamata

NEW DELHI: The rebellion within the Trinamool Congress (TMC) entered a new phase on Wednesday after expelled leader Ritabrata Banerjee claimed that West Bengal assembly speaker Rathindra Bose had accepted the rebel camp's claim for legislature party status.

The development came after the rebel group submitted documents asserting that it represented the principal opposition in the assembly. The camp also announced a parallel leadership structure, staked claim to the opposition benches.

Also Read | Expelled TMC leader Ritabrata Banerjee claims speaker has accepted rebel group's status

Yet amid this battle unfolding inside the assembly and the party, the rebels have been remarkably careful not to challenge Mamata Banerjee herself. Instead, their fire has been directed almost entirely at her nephew and political heir, Abhishek Banerjee.

The latest statements from the rebel camp suggest the crisis may be less about Mamata Banerjee's leadership and more about growing unease over Abhishek Banerjee's authority and the succession process within the party.

Also Read | TMC split on display: Rebel leaders attend CM Suvendu Adhikari's review meeting

The rebels are now projecting themselves not merely as dissidents but as the legitimate opposition bloc inside the assembly.

"We are the real and main opposition in West Bengal assembly according to parliamentary norms," Ritabrata Banerjee said after claiming speaker's nod.

Meanwhile, Sandipan Saha said the leader of opposition chamber had been allotted to the rebel camp and that the LoP was already functioning from the office.

The camp also announced a new legislature-party structure, with Javed Khan, Sandipan Saha, Sabina Yasmin and Shiuli Saha named deputy leaders.

Yet even while asserting institutional legitimacy, the rebels have gone out of their way to keep Mamata Banerjee above the conflict.

Both Ritabrata Banerjee and Sandipan Saha publicly appealed to Mamata Banerjee to continue guiding the group.

"We request Mamata Banerjee to play the role of chief adviser of the TMC legislature party," Ritabrata said.

"It is our desire that Mamata Didi continues to serve as our advisor, offering us her counsel so that we, along with the LoP and the chief whip, can effectively steer the party within the legislative assembly," Saha added.

The message is unmistakable. The rebels are not seeking to displace Mamata Banerjee. Instead, they are attempting to claim legitimacy in her name while challenging the leadership structure that has evolved around her.

The Abhishek question

The immediate trigger for the crisis explains this clearly.

The controversy erupted over the appointment of the leader of opposition after TMC national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee communicated the party's decision to the speaker. Ritabrata Banerjee and Sandipan Saha challenged that process, alleging that no such resolution had been passed at the legislative party meeting and that several signatures had been fabricated.

The dispute, therefore, is not over Mamata Banerjee's leadership. It is over the authority exercised by Abhishek Banerjee and the functioning of the organisation under him.

Notably, even the TMC's defence of the LoP appointment has centred on Abhishek Banerjee's communication to the speaker. Party leaders have repeatedly argued that his letter is the only valid document before the assembly, placing Abhishek at the centre of the confrontation.

The rebels, meanwhile, are no longer merely questioning a procedural decision but openly assigning political responsibility.

"The sorry state to which the party has been reduced, in some measure, is a failure on the part of Abhishek Banerjee. After all, if you claim credit when things go well, you must also accept responsibility when things go wrong," Sandipan Saha said.

The statement is notable because it directly links the party's recent electoral and organisational troubles to Abhishek Banerjee's leadership while leaving Mamata Banerjee largely untouched.

That is also why the latest developments may be viewed by many as a proxy battle over succession.

For years, Abhishek Banerjee has been widely seen as Mamata Banerjee's political heir. He has emerged as the party's principal strategist, chief campaigner and organisational face after Mamata. As his influence grew, so did concerns among sections of the old guard who felt increasingly sidelined.

The current rebellion appears to have brought those tensions into the open.

After the party expelled Ritabrata Banerjee, he drew a sharp distinction between Mamata and Abhishek.

"The party has expelled me, but I believe that I am still with the TMC ... Abhishek Banerjee is nobody in the 18th West Bengal state legislative assembly," he told reporters.

When asked about Mamata Banerjee, however, his tone was markedly different.

"Mamata Banerjee is a tall leader. I may be expelled from the party, but I have not lost respect for her. She is still my leader," he said.

Ritabrata also mocked Abhishek's political troubles following the election setback and the subsequent signature controversy. Referring to protests directed at the TMC leader, he quipped before reporters: "At least people aren't shouting 'thief, thief' at me."

His criticism of Abhishek, however, did not begin with the current crisis.

Over recent months, Ritabrata emerged as one of Abhishek Banerjee's most vocal internal critics. He questioned the growing role of consultants and strategists in party affairs and criticised what he viewed as excessive centralisation of decision-making.

Following the party's electoral setback, he publicly raised concerns about whether a handful of advisers had become more influential than grassroots leaders. While Abhishek was not always named directly, the criticism was widely interpreted as targeting the leadership structure associated with him.

That helps explain why the rebels' confrontation has focused on decisions communicated by Abhishek Banerjee rather than on Mamata Banerjee herself.

After claiming legitimacy by speaker Ritabrata said: "Abhishek Banerjee will have absolutely no role in it. Neither our legislative party nor the party organisation has any connection whatsoever with him. Nor does the public have any connection with him. The people of Bengal have absolutely no connection with him."

Why Mamata remains untouchable

The rebel group has made sure not to confront "Didi".

Mamata Banerjee remains the party's biggest mass leader and its most recognisable face. Directly challenging her risks alienating a large section of TMC workers and supporters.

For dissatisfied leaders, challenging Abhishek instead allows them to frame their rebellion not as a revolt against the party founder but as a fight against a leadership style, an organisational model and, ultimately, a succession process that has accelerated after the assembly poll debacle.

Significantly, the rebels are also attempting to avoid the perception of being obstructionists.

Ritabrata Banerjee said the group would oppose state government policies it considered wrong but would not oppose them "for the sake of opposing".

That formulation appears designed to project the faction as a credible parliamentary opposition rather than a breakaway outfit motivated solely by internal factionalism. It also strengthens their effort to claim institutional legitimacy while continuing to invoke Mamata Banerjee's moral authority.

Taken together, the statements signals a rebellion carefully calibrated to target Abhishek Banerjee's leadership without directly confronting Mamata Banerjee. If anything, the rebels appear to be arguing that they are defending the party's original character under Mamata while resisting what they view as excessive concentration of authority around her political heir.

That is what makes the current crisis significant.

Regional parties across the country have often struggled during succession transitions. The eventual Shiv Sena split after Bal Thackeray and the NCP's internal battle over succession after Sharad Pawar demonstrated how questions of inheritance can quickly become questions of power.

The TMC now appears to be confronting its own version of that dilemma.

The central question facing the party may therefore have shifted.

The issue is no longer simply whether a group of legislators can challenge the party leadership. The rebels now claim to have secured recognition within the assembly while continuing to invoke Mamata Banerjee's authority.

Their argument is not that Mamata Banerjee should be replaced. It is that the system operating beneath her leadership has failed.

For now, both camps still claim Mamata Banerjee's legacy. The real contest is over whether Abhishek Banerjee can command the same unquestioned authority across the organisation that his aunt has exercised for decades.