Union Minister Kiren Rijiju lashes out at Rahul Gandhi’s comments made in Colombia, accusing the Congress leader of India-shaming and setting a dangerous precedent for political discourse abroad.

New Delhi / Bogotá (Colombia) : Monday, October 6, 2025

In a fresh political confrontation, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju on Monday sharply rebuked Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over his recent remarks made during a visit to Colombia, demanding: “Show me one Leader of Opposition (LoP) who has gone outside India and made statements against the country.” Rijiju’s comments came amid heightened tensions between the BJP and Congress over the propriety of political leaders criticizing their own country in foreign lands.

The Colombia remarks and political fallout

During his trip to Columbia, Rahul Gandhi had made pointed criticisms of India’s current political trajectory, asserting that the BJP-led government posed a challenge to democratic norms and institutions. He had said that while he remained optimistic about India’s potential, structural flaws needed corrective action, and that there was an “attack on democracy” underway. The Times of India+1

The BJP was swift to respond. Rijiju, speaking to reporters, accused Gandhi of indulging in “India-shaming & India-bashing,” insisting that such statements could harm India’s image abroad. He challenged the Congress party to identify any past LoP who had taken similar liberties and invoked former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, emphasizing that she never publicly criticized the country when abroad. “Show me one Leader of Opposition who has ever gone outside India and made statements against the country or the government. Rahul Gandhi is the first,” he said.

Rijiju additionally questioned Congress’s understanding of free speech, suggesting that the right to dissent does not extend to international forums where foreign audiences may interpret internal dissent as a weakness. He implied that Rahul’s remarks were not merely domestic criticism but could be exploited internationally.

Congress strikes back: “Misplaced tactic”

The Congress party, refusing to accept the attack, defended Rahul Gandhi’s remarks as legitimate expressions of concern. Party leaders described the BJP’s reaction as a diversionary tactic aimed at silencing political critique rather than addressing real governance failures.

Congress organisational secretary K.C. Venugopal responded sharply, stating that whether Gandhi spoke in Colombia or Kanpur, the content of his message remained consistent: India’s government was failing to live up to its promises, especially in areas of democracy, accountability, and economic justice. He accused the BJP of deploying a “hackneyed” strategy of attacking personalities to deflect from policy criticism.

Venugopal added: “Our democratic system being hijacked is a matter that has brought us disrepute across the world, courtesy the BJP itself.” He questioned whether criticism of governance should be conflated with disloyalty.

Political context & implications

This clash occurs against the backdrop of intensifying scrutiny of India’s democratic institutions and political dissent. The BJP has long maintained that India’s critics — especially those in the opposition — should be cautious when speaking on global stages, lest they hand ammunition to international observers critical of India’s internal politics.

For its part, Congress and its allies have frequently accused the BJP of stifling dissent, undermining press freedom, and centralizing power. Rahul Gandhi’s international engagements and speeches have provoked such confrontations in the past, but the Colombia episode seems to have ratcheted up tensions.

Observers see Rijiju’s remarks as part of a broader narrative the BJP is attempting to build — equating critical political speech with disloyalty or denigration of the nation. In doing so, critics say, the space for legitimate political dissent may be narrowed.

The question of propriety: Can critics speak abroad?

One of the key arguments Rijiju advanced is that domestic critics should not export their dissent to foreign audiences. He suggested that Rahul Gandhi’s Colombia remarks could reflect poorly on India internationally, painting internal issues as systemic failures.

On the other side, Congress and free speech advocates argue that political leaders should not be muzzled when engaging with global audiences. They contend that discussing India’s challenges on the world stage is legitimate, especially in an era of global interconnectedness and scrutiny.

What becomes crucial here is the balance between safeguarding a country’s image abroad and preserving democratic rights to criticism and dissent.

Reactions from media, civil society & public

Media and civil society voices have weighed in:

• Some editorial commentators warn that penalizing leaders for raising grave concerns abroad could lead to a chilling effect on political debate.
• Others point out that every global comment by a leader is scrutinized — whether flattering or critical — and that political actors must anticipate both support and backlash.
• Analysts note that invoking Indira Gandhi’s name is symbolic: it ties the debate to India’s legacy of strong leadership and the norms expected of national figures.

On social media, partisans on both sides have picked up the controversy. BJP loyalists say Rahul Gandhi consistently disrespects India on foreign soil, while Congress supporters defend his remarks as brave critique.

What to watch ahead

• Naming precedent: Will Congress or any other party present a prior example of a LoP speaking negatively abroad, thereby countering Rijiju’s challenge?
• Further BJP attacks: Expect the BJP to frame the incident as evidence that Rahul Gandhi is more interested in foreign applause than national service.
• Congress response strategy: Will Congress lean into international audiences to defend its positions or stay domestic?
• Media framing: How mainstream media, both in India and globally, situate the debate: as an internal spat or a question of India’s image and democratic health.

Source: