In the annual Legal Conclave 2025, Rahul Gandhi claimed that the late Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley was sent against him so that he would not oppose agricultural laws. But in response, Rohan Jaitley strictly dismissed the allegation and made it clear that the Agriculture Act came into force in 2020, while his father had passed away in August 2019, which makes the claim factually impossible.

Rohan Jaitley took to social media to correct the record, noting clearly: “Let me remind him, my father passed away in 2019. The farm laws were introduced in 2020.” He further contested the notion that Arun Jaitley would threaten someone, emphasizing that it was simply not in his nature. Describing his father as a “staunch democrat who believed in building consensus,” he said Jaitley would have instead invited open dialogue to reach common ground. This response triggered renewed political debate. Critics argue that invoking the legacy of a leader no longer alive requires great care, and some called Gandhi’s remarks insensitive, especially given a similar misstep involving Manohar Parrikar’s final days. Rohan asked Rahul Gandhi to be “mindful while speaking of those not with us”.

The exchange underscores how quickly political narrative can spiral when basic facts like the year of death versus the year legislation was enacted don’t align. For many, the core issue isn’t just who said what, but whether political assertions uphold factual accuracy and respect for legacy.

In summary, the farm laws introduced in 2020 serve as a clear anchor point in this dispute, invalidating the earlier claim and reinforcing Arun Jaitley’s commitment to dialogue over intimidation a legacy his son insists remains undiluted.