Interview: I am not positioning myself as future CM, says Chirag Paswan

Hindustan Times

11 hours ago

Union cabinet minister and LJP (RV) chief Chirag Paswan took everyone by surprise by his recent announcement that he wished to contest the Bihar assembly elections later this year. For the first time, his Lok Janshakti Party will contest in a pre-poll alliance with the ruling Janata Dal United (JDU). While Paswan's party has no presence in the current assembly, his party won all five seats it contested in last year's general elections. The 42-year-old son of LJP founder and former minister, the late Ram Vilas Paswan, has not been afraid to chart his own path, sometimes voicing opinions that may be different that of his alliance partner BJP. He spoke to HT about the reason he wants to contest, the Waqf law, and the proposal to amend the preamble to the constitution. LJP (Ram Vilas) chief Chirag Paswan spoke to HT about the reason he wants to contest, the Waqf law, and the proposal to amend the preamble to the constitution. (PTI)
You dropped a bombshell by saying that you are going to contest. What did the Prime Minister and Amit Shah say in response to this?
I have not spoken to them yet. I have expressed my wish that I want to go back to my state because this is my third term as a member of Parliament and over the past 11 years, I have realised that the kind of vision that I have for my state -- Bihar first, Bihari first-- is not possible (to achieve) living in Delhi. Also we have seen these experiments by the BJP, where they have fielded their MPs and even their central ministers for state elections, which really benefitted them. So, I have asked for a survey to analyse whether me contesting is beneficial for the party and for the alliance.
What do you have to say to those people who say this is basically setting up Chirag Paswan to become a future CM candidate?
To be very honest, I'm not. This is just not my agenda. I'm not looking for any post or positioning myself as a future CM. There is absolutely no vacancy in 2025. My current chief minister (Nitish Kumar), under his leadership, we're going to enter the elections and we will be having a historic win this time. So there's no vacancy this time. And even for the future
But Deputy CM?
No, no, no, no, no, no. I mean a) I'm not aiming for any post and b) I'll never be open to be a Deputy Chief Minister.
Why?
I mean, there are a lot of people in my party, in my state, whom I want to give this responsibility to. If there's such a circumstance coming up, they will be the one who will be taking over.
The Bihar election 2020 was all about you against the current chief minister. You have made up with him?
I'll not shy away from the fact there were a lot of differences between me and my chief minister, which were resolved before I got back into the alliance. In a way, I felt cornered in that alliance immediately after the (2019) Lok Sabha election. I felt that I was ignored. Also, that was the time when my father was not very well. And I do understand that at that time they must have thought that I was not that important.
When I felt that I didn't have any say, if I had any issues or any concerns, the only platform I had at that time was a public platform or media. And that's the reason the differences between me and the CM were highlighted. But now I get that space. Not that I don't have concerns and issues now; of course I do have. But then I get that space within the alliance and they do get addressed as well.
Was it awkward making up?
No, not really. I think we are heading different parties and, if you are a different party, you have different ideologies. So, he (Kumar) knew, there are political compulsions. The Bharatiya Janata Party worked as a beautiful catalyst between the two of us. Naddaji (BJP chief and Union minister J P Nadda) played a very, very important role. I remember when my Chief Minister came back to the alliance (in 2024) and we were going to Bihar for his oath-taking ceremony in his chartered plane, we spoke a lot and he assured me that all my concerns and issues will be addressed. And in due course of time, it was done as well
Recently, the Election Commission announced a special intensive revision of the electoral roll in Bihar. And it has caused a lot of controversy.
I think this is one issue which has just been blown out of proportion. This process takes place on a regular basis. And you have to do this.I think India is one of those countries where the political parties and leaders are absolutely okay with having people living in their country without even knowing whether they are the actual citizens of your country or not. They are okay with having ghoospathiyas (infiltrators) in our country. Opposition is trying to establish this narrative that documents are needed, but you are given endless options to provide documentation.
You are saying it is okay to do a citizenship drive months before elections?
This is July, yes, we have time in hand.
What is going to be the biggest issue of Bihar elections?
I would love to have issues concerning unemployment, development, better infrastructure development. These are the topics that need to be addressed, discussed. Because I want to tell the people of my state how Bihar was in the 90s, during their tenure. Because right now what is happening is that my Chief Minister has been in the state for almost two decades now and the instant comparison that the first-time voters do, is with different states. They look at Delhi, Mumbai,and say it is so developed, why not Bihar? Because they don't know how Bihar was. I have seen that era .
But then the problem is that when elections come, these narratives, ECI, Waqf Board emerge and election centres around communalism and casteism.
Are you concerned about the Waqf Law?
I am concerned. I was concerned. It is the reason why mine was one of those parties which very strongly asked the government that the bill be sent to a standing committee. I am happy that my Prime Minister took this decision to form a joint parliamentary committee. I wanted that all the stakeholders should get this opportunity to voice their opinions . I gave a lot of them, many of them were accepted too. See, anybody who goes through the amendments that have been made in Waqf law will understand that this is absolutely pro-poor Muslims. This is not a matter of dharam (faith), this is a matter of administration.
Will the issue have an impact?
I don't think so because I think any Muslim who is educated, comes from a poor background, understands that it is for his good. So, a handful of them think that they are losing control of the Waqf, they are the only ones who are panicking right now.
Some of your cabinet colleagues have said the words inserted in the preamble in 1976, socialist and secular should be taken out. Where do you stand?
To begin with, I come from a party, I am the son of a leader who is always a voice for socialism, for secularism out loud. I am not debating over these two words. But, when you don't support Emergency, any decision that was taken during the Emergency, I don't support . So, I don't support any decision that was taken (at the time), whether it was of nasbandi(sterilisation), beautification of Delhi (demolition drive in Turkman Gate) where the whole colony was destroyed and all the Muslims were thrown out. This (the change in the preamble) was taken during that time. Now, my belief is in Dr. Babasaheb Bheem Rao Ambedkar. My leader, Ram Vilas Paswanji always believed and followed the ideology of Babasaheb. Do you really think that during a detailed discussion over the formulation of the constitution, this was not discussed ? Whether the words like secularism should be the part of the constitution or not? And that too, when that committee was headed by Babasaheb. So, I am not getting into the merits of the words. The whole process how it was done and when it was done -- during Emergency -- that is our concern