The recent confrontation between West Bengal's ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) and central investigative agencies has escalated into a dramatic constitutional standoff. The flashpoint occurred on Thursday, January 10, 2026, when Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials conducted raids in Kolkata and Delhi. In a bold move, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and state police personnel physically positioned themselves to obstruct the central agency's operations.
A Long History of Confrontation
This incident is not an isolated event but the latest chapter in a protracted battle between the Banerjee administration and agencies like the ED and CBI. The conflict has deep roots, with significant past episodes shaping the current hostility. A major showdown occurred in 2019 during the investigation into the Saradha and Rose Valley scams, when the CBI sought to question the then Kolkata police commissioner. Chief Minister Banerjee responded with a dramatic sit-in protest. Another violent flare-up happened in 2024 in Sandeshkhali, where ED personnel were attacked amid allegations of collusion between TMC leaders and the West Bengal Police.
A clear pattern emerges from these recurring clashes. The central agencies, under the BJP-led government at the Centre, face persistent accusations of selectively targeting political opponents. Statistics reveal that a vast majority of cases filed by the ED and CBI against politicians during the Modi government's tenure have involved Opposition leaders, often coinciding with state elections.
The Fight for I-PAC and the Risk of Overreach
The immediate trigger for the latest standoff is the ED's action against I-PAC (Indian Political Action Committee), a political consultancy currently working with the TMC and the DMK. The agency alleges I-PAC's involvement in coal smuggling and money laundering. This consultancy is a key part of the ecosystem that evolved around the BJP's landmark 2014 Lok Sabha campaign.
In defending I-PAC, isn't Mamata Banerjee fighting a necessary battle against perceived political vendetta? The answer is nuanced. The Opposition has a legitimate right, even a duty, to highlight the weaponisation of central agencies, a charge the BJP itself levelled when it famously dubbed the CBI a "caged parrot" during the previous UPA regime.
Undermining the Constitutional High Ground
However, Banerjee's methods threaten to sabotage her own cause. As the elected Chief Minister, she is not merely a party chief but a constitutional authority. By framing the conflict as "Your Agency versus My Police," she bypasses due process and forsakes the institutional high ground. India's system relies on countervailing institutions and checks and balances; substituting them with direct confrontation weakens constitutional governance.
The merits of the ED's case against I-PAC must be determined through lawful judicial process, not on the streets. Within her own party, her nephew and TMC national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee has previously faced ED questioning in cases related to illegal mining and the cash-for-school jobs scam. The Chief Minister can and should question the Centre's control over the agencies, but she must simultaneously allow the law to proceed. I-PAC is entitled to defend itself legally.
Any other approach raises uncomfortable questions about the intimacy between the party and the consultancy, obscuring the larger, crucial issue of institutional independence and political misuse of investigative bodies. The fight must be for preserving institutional integrity, not for protecting specific individuals or entities from legal scrutiny.
