Bhubaneswar, Jan 19: A fresh controversy has erupted in Odisha after a copy of the speech delivered by former Chief Minister and Biju Janata Dal (BJD) supremo Naveen Patnaik on the party’s foundation day surfaced in public.

The document revealed that the Odia speech was written in English script, raising questions about the importance given to Odia language and identity during his long tenure.

For nearly three decades, Naveen Patnaik has been criticized for his limited command over Odia. The revelation that he read Odia speeches written in Roman script has triggered sharp reactions from various quarters.

Also read: Superintendent and Ex-Jailor Trade Charges as Chaudwar Jail Escape Controversy Deepens

Critics argue that this practice undermined Odia pride and cultural identity, while projecting an image of fluency that was not genuine.

Senior journalist Akshaya Kumar Sahoo shared a portion of the speech copy on social media, exposing how Odia was transliterated into English letters for Naveen’s delivery.

The post quickly went viral, sparking heated debates about the role of language in politics and governance. Many commentators claimed that this practice symbolized a disconnect between the leader and the linguistic heritage of the state.

Supporters of Odia identity expressed outrage, stating that the revelation was a betrayal of Odia pride. They alleged that for 29 years, the people of Odisha were misled into believing that their leader was speaking in Odia with authenticity. The incident has reignited discussions about the preservation and promotion of Odia language in official and political spheres.

Observers note that while Naveen Patnaik’s political image was carefully crafted, the reliance on English script for Odia speeches highlights deeper issues of cultural representation. The controversy has also opened up broader debates about how political leaders engage with regional languages and the importance of linguistic pride in shaping public perception.

As the debate intensifies, the incident is being seen as a turning point in discussions about Odia identity, language politics, and the legacy of Naveen Patnaik’s leadership.