Why in News

• Introduced in Lok Sabha by the Union Home Minister during the Monsoon Session

• Passed by voice vote and sent to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for scrutiny

• Triggered strong opposition protests

  • Critics call it “unconstitutional,” “undemocratic,” and a potential tool for political misuse

• Triggered by high-profile cases where sitting Chief Ministers and Ministers remained in office despite being jailed

  • Examples: Tamil Nadu, Delhi, Jharkhand

Objective of the Bill

• Enhance accountability of ministers (Union and State), including Prime Minister and Chief Ministers

• Prevent ministers accused of serious criminal offenses from continuing in office while in custody

• Ensure constitutional morality, integrity, and public trust in governance

Key Provisions of the Bill

• Scope

• • Prime Minister and Union Ministers

  • Chief Ministers and State Ministers

  • Ministers of Union Territories, including Delhi and J&K

• Removal Mechanism

• • Minister arrested and held in continuous custody for 30 days for an offense punishable with 5 years or more imprisonment will be removed automatically on the 31st day

  • Removal authority

    • Union Ministers: President, on advice of Prime Minister or directly

    • State Ministers: Governor, on advice of Chief Minister

    • Chief Ministers: Governor directly

• Detention, Not Conviction

• • Removal is based on detention duration, not conviction

  • Minister can be reappointed after release, making it a temporary preventive measure

• Legal Amendments

• • Article 75 – Prime Minister and Union Ministers

  • Article 164 – Chief Ministers and State Ministers

  • Article 239AA – Governance of NCT of Delhi and its ministers

Need for the Bill

• Upholding Constitutional Morality

• • Ministers are expected to act beyond suspicion and maintain public trust

  • Arrested ministers may thwart constitutional values if allowed to continue in office

• Filling Constitutional Gap

• • No current provision mandates removal of detained ministers

• Curbing Criminalization of Politics

• • Prevents ministers facing grave criminal allegations from continuing in office

• Drawing Parallel with Bureaucrats

• • Civil servants are suspended after brief custody

  • Ministers, as public servants, should face a higher standard

• Prompting Accountability

• • 30-day detention gives enough time for a minister to secure bail or respond legally

Criticisms & Concerns

• Violation of ‘Innocent Until Proven Guilty’

• • Removes ministers based on detention, not conviction

  • Undermines due process of law

• Potential Political Misuse

• • Can be weaponized by Centre against opposition-ruled states

  • Investigative agencies like CBI and ED may be used to trigger removal

• Arbitrary Detention Period

• • 30-day limit seen as tactical, not principled

• Conflict with Existing Laws

• • Representation of the People Act, 1951: Disqualification only after conviction

  • Lily Thomas Case & Manoj Narula Case: SC ruled disqualification happens from conviction stage; Bill sets lower standard

• Threat to Federalism

• • Centralizes power, weakening state autonomy

• Ethical Governance vs Democratic Safeguards

• • Proponents: aligns with Supreme Court observations on integrity in office

  • Critics: undermines democratic norms and separation of powers

• Judicial Challenges Likely

• • May be tested under Basic Structure Doctrine (independence of executive, separation of powers)

Comparison with Existing Framework

• Section 8, RPA, 1951

• • Legislators disqualified only upon conviction with 2+ years imprisonment

• Law Commission 170th Report

• • Suggested disqualification from charge framing stage for serious offences (5+ years)

  • Did not address pre-conviction custody

• Limitation

• • Current laws allow jailed ministers to continue in office; Bill addresses this gap

Constitution Amendment Bills

• Definition

• • Legislative proposals to modify Constitution, under Article 368

• Requirements

• • Special majority: 2/3 of members present and voting in each House

  • Ratification by half of state legislatures if affecting federal provisions

Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC)

• Purpose

• • Examine complex or controversial legislation

• Composition

• • Members from Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha

  • Typically 31 members: 21 LS, 10 RS

• Functions

• • Scrutinize bills clause-by-clause

  • Gather expert opinions

  • Submit recommendatory report to Parliament (not binding)

Conclusion

• Aims to address criminalization of politics, corruption, and constitutional morality

• Ensures ministers cannot continue in office while in custody for serious offenses

• Raises serious concerns about due process, federalism, and political misuse

• Safeguards against misuse and constitutional scrutiny will decide its future