Babun Banerjee’s remarks have widened a family and organisational dispute that first broke into the open during the 2024 Lok Sabha election cycle, when Mamata Banerjee cut ties with him after he opposed the party’s choice of Prasun Banerjee for the Howrah seat. His latest intervention has placed the spotlight back on the influence of senior Trinamool leaders, the role of Abhishek Banerjee in party affairs, and the relationship between the party’s political network and state-linked institutions during its 15-year tenure in government.
The allegations centre on claims that former sports minister Aroop Biswas and fire services minister Sujit Bose worked against Babun Banerjee’s interests in sports bodies and used pressure to block his rise in the sector. He has alleged that members of sports associations were warned about possible consequences if they backed him, including disruption of government support. The claims have not been independently established, and the leaders named have not publicly accepted the accusations.
Babun Banerjee also claimed that access to Mamata Banerjee and Trinamool national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee had become increasingly difficult, describing a system in which security layers and party gatekeeping kept him away from the leadership. His remarks portray the party as a highly centralised organisation in which informal channels and trusted aides shaped access to authority.
The remarks come at a volatile moment for Trinamool. The party is attempting to hold together its legislative and municipal network after losing the West Bengal Assembly election, with the Bharatiya Janata Party securing a decisive majority and Trinamool pushed into opposition. The defeat has produced recriminations over candidate selection, election management, organisational control and the influence of external political consultants.
Two expelled Trinamool MLAs, Sandipan Saha and Ritabrata Banerjee, have been at the centre of a separate controversy over alleged forged signatures linked to internal party paperwork. The dispute has fed speculation over whether a larger factional challenge could emerge inside Trinamool, though claims of a split have been denied by some of those named in the political chatter. Under the anti-defection framework, any organised legislative breakaway would require substantial numbers to move together to avoid disqualification, making speculation difficult to translate into immediate political arithmetic.
Babun Banerjee’s praise for BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari has given the row a sharper political edge. He described Adhikari in warm terms and indicated willingness to work with him if invited, fuelling speculation that his criticism of Trinamool could be used by the BJP to reinforce its campaign narrative that Mamata Banerjee’s party is disintegrating from within. The BJP’s state leadership, however, has publicly said it does not want a wholesale induction of Trinamool leaders, arguing that its victory was driven by grassroots mobilisation rather than defections.
Mamata Banerjee has sought to frame the turmoil as part of a wider attempt to weaken Trinamool through money, intimidation and political pressure. At a Kolkata protest over alleged attacks on party leaders and workers after the election, she accused the BJP of trying to break her organisation and urged opposition parties to respond collectively. Trinamool leaders have also alleged that senior figures, including Abhishek Banerjee and Kalyan Banerjee, were targeted during visits to affected areas.
The BJP has rejected those allegations and countered that Trinamool is facing public anger after years in power. Party leaders have argued that Mamata Banerjee’s protests are aimed at diverting attention from organisational collapse, corruption allegations and public resentment. The Congress and Left, weakened in the state’s changing political landscape, have also criticised Trinamool’s record while condemning violence against political workers.
The Babun Banerjee episode carries particular weight because it cuts across both family and party lines. Mamata Banerjee has long presented herself as a leader opposed to dynastic entitlement, and her 2024 decision to disown her brother was framed as proof that family ties would not override party discipline. Babun Banerjee’s latest allegations revive that history while suggesting that the same party structure also marginalised insiders who fell out of favour.
For Trinamool, the danger is not only the allegation itself but the timing. A defeated party can absorb criticism when its command structure remains intact, but overlapping disputes over leadership access, candidate choices, sports bodies, municipal resignations, alleged forged signatures and attacks on workers point to a wider struggle over authority. The party still retains a large cadre base, parliamentary presence and Mamata Banerjee’s personal appeal, yet its transition from ruling party to opposition has exposed tensions that were easier to contain while it held state power.
