Bharat Rashtra Samithi working president K T Rama Rao has been raising a hue and cry over Telangana assembly speaker’s order on Wednesday refusing to disqualify five MLAs who allegedly defected to the Congress has failed to get much support in the media and political circles.
The speaker Gaddam Prasad Kumar ruled that the five MLAs had not defected from the BRS to the Congress and there is no strong evidence to prove it. A similar decision is expected in the case of other MLAs as well.
Maybe, a couple of them – like Kadiyam Srihari and Danam Nagender – might have to quit their seats, as they openly aligned with the Congress in the last Lok Sabha elections.
KTR, described the decision as “unjust, illegal and undemocratic.”
He alleged that the Congress lacked respect for the Constitution and the law, and claimed the ruling was motivated by fear of public backlash in by-elections.
However, analysts point out what they called a contradiction in BRS’s stand, recalling the party’s record during K Chandrashekar Rao’s tenure, when large-scale defections and even party mergers were actively encouraged.
Political observers argue that while defections undeniably occurred during the previous BRS regime, they were often defended using legal and technical interpretations. KCR often used the term “political realignment” to justify such moves.
KTR defended his party’s past actions by drawing a sharp distinction between “defections” and “mergers”, arguing that mergers were constitutional and therefore legitimate.
Commentators noted that while KCR often used carefully crafted political language to justify defections, KTR’s articulation appeared blunt, focusing solely on legality rather than public perception or ethical considerations.
They say if what BRS did in the past was acceptable, while similar actions by the current Congress government are condemnable.
“KTR is defending the defections in the past on technical grounds, rather than moral grounds. Now, the speaker, too, is justifying the decision on technical grounds, rather than moral grounds,” an analyst argued.
He said if piecemeal defections are portrayed as unethical, while wholesale mergers are presented as civilised—even though both ultimately undermine voter trust.
Political analysts warn that such justifications ignore the fundamental issue: elected representatives switching loyalties amounts to a betrayal of the mandate given by voters.