New Delhi: Arvind Kejriwal’s former colleagues blame Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) loss in the Delhi assembly election against the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on the party chief’s propaganda and boasting and moving away from the “idea of offering an alternative politics” or political approach.
After 27 long years, the saffron party regained power in Delhi by bagging 48 of the 70 assembly seats. AAP could manage to win 22 seats, a sharp decline from its 2020 poll tally of 62.
Swaraj India party co-founder and psephologist Yogendra Yadav, a former founding member of AAP who was expelled from the party in 2015 along with Prashant Bhushan, dubbed the party’s defeat a massive setback for all those who expected an alternative political approach.
‘The party turned into a non-transparent, corrupt entity’
Bhushan pointed out that Kejriwal bears much of the responsibility for AAP’s Delhi loss. A party originally founded on the ideals of alternative politics, transparency, accountability, and democracy was transformed by Arvind into a supremo-dominated, non-transparent, and corrupt entity. The party abandoned its pursuit of a Lokpal and even removed its own Lokpal, he added.
Bhushan said Kejriwal constructed a Rs 45-crore ‘Sheesh Mahal’ for himself and moved around in luxury cars. He pointed out that Kejriwal discarded 33 detailed policy reports from expert committees established by AAP, stating that it would adopt pragmatic policies when the right time comes. The ousted AAP leader said that Kejriwal “felt that politics could be done by bluster and propaganda”. This is the beginning of the end of AAP, he underlined.
‘Got restricted to welfare schemes’
Yogendra Yadav called AAP’s loss a massive setback not just for the AAP but “all those who dreamt of alternative politics in this country 10-12 years ago”.
Yadav was quoted as saying by PTI that the defeat was a setback for all the parties which backed AAP and for the entire opposition in the country. He claimed the that APP “gave up” on alternative politics soon after it came to power and got itself restricted to welfare schemes that reached a point of saturation.
