4 min readNew DelhiAug 21, 2026 04:53 AM IST First published on: Aug 21, 2026 at 04:52 AM ISTA day after the Congress Working Committee (CWC) reaffirmed that only the first two stanzas of Vande Mataram would be sung at party events, there is a growing sense of unease in sections of the party that believe the leadership should have handled the matter with more nuance.Noted lawyer and the Congress’s legal wing head Abhishek Manu Singhvi told The Indian Express that he had given the party leadership his legal opinion, interpreting the law “as it stands today”, and drew a distinction between public and private functions. This comes barely a week after Vande Mataram was sung in its entirety during the official Independence Day events in Congress-ruled Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, and Telangana, as well as Jharkhand, where the party is a junior ally in the JMM-led government. The Congress-led government in Kerala skipped the rendition of the national song altogether.Advertisement“It was a wide ball. The party could have left it rather than having a go at it,” said a CWC member, while another member said, “There are more important issues that are playing out. The aspirations of students, chanda chori (allegations of donation theft at the Ayodhya Ram Temple), the government seems to be on the backfoot. We should not have played to the BJP’s strength.”Read | Why Congress will sing only the first two stanzas of Vande Mataram, and what the other four sayYet another CWC member said the Congress did not oppose the Prevention of Insults to National Honour (Amendment) Bill, 2026, in Parliament as the House was in turmoil at the time. The Lok Sabha cleared the Bill in about 15 minutes on July 30 amid protests from Congress and Samajwadi Party MPs. The DMK was the only Opposition party to participate in the discussion.“We did not oppose the Bill in Parliament because the House was then in turmoil and the Bill was passed in the din. But it is also a fact that we did not oppose the Bill outside Parliament, as we spoke against delimitation or the FCRA amendment Bill. Now, we are saying all this,” said the Congress leader.AdvertisementRead | Congress’s M Kharge says ‘hurt’ by party leaders’ stance on ‘purification’ rowOn Wednesday, the CWC, the Congress’s highest decision-making body, cited a 1937 CWC resolution to argue that the leading lights of the freedom movement, including Mahatma Gandhi and Rabindranath Tagore, had backed limiting the public rendition of Vande Mataram to its first two stanzas. Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi, Mallikarjun Kharge and Rahul Gandhi at the CWC meeting in New Delhi, Wednesday. (Express photo by Anil Sharma)Defending the decision, CWC member Kanhaiya Kumar told The Indian Express, “We had to take a clear-cut stand. Otherwise, there would have been confusion among the rank and file. We have to defend the legacy of the freedom movement as it is our legacy.”Singhvi’s ‘public-private’ distinctionSinghvi said there was a distinction between public and private functions and that the amended law was silent on the rendition of Vande Mataram in a “particular way”.you may like“The law talks about national official functions … it does not say anything about private functions in your house, hotel, or institution. Moreover, the law is about obstructing the singing of the national song, preventing the singing or causing disturbance to any assembly engaged in such singing,” said the Rajya Sabha MP.“The Congress is talking about its internal party functions and not government functions. There is a deliberate attempt by the BJP to conflate patriotism into a six-stanza test and spread misinformation against the Congress. The Congress was the one which elevated Vande Mataram to the national song status and gave it a status equal to the national anthem,” Singhvi said.Asked about Kerala skipping the rendition of Vande Mataram at the government’s official Independence Day function, he said, “Individual state governments can take their decisions.”