- The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill seeks removal of PMs, CMs and ministers jailed over 30 days
- The Bill allows removal based on allegation without conviction but permits reappointment after release
- Opposition protested violently, calling the Bill draconian and a threat to democracy and individual freedom
The Lok Sabha erupted in protests yesterday when Union Home Minister Amit Shah introduced the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill that states that the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers and ministers, if jailed for more than 30 days for offences that attract a jail term of over five years, can be removed from office.
The Opposition, predictably, termed the legislation "draconian" and "unconstitutional" and alleged a plan by the ruling BJP to misuse central agencies, frame non-BJP Chief Ministers, put them in jail and destabilise state governments. The government maintained that the Bill had been brought to "elevate the declining moral standards" and maintain integrity in politics.
Scratch the surface, and an interesting story emerges. A Constitution amendment Bill requires to be passed in both Houses by a two-thirds majority. The NDA does not have the numbers to get this through Parliament, unless a key Opposition party such as the Congress backs it. And the Opposition is in no mood to do so. The question then is why the government would spark uproar in Parliament and court a political storm by introducing a law it knows it can't implement in its current form. The devil is in the details, and a closer look shows that this legislation may be aimed at a larger perception battle.
The Law
The Constitution Amendment Bill aims to amend three articles in the Constitution of India -- Articles 75, 164 and 239AA. It states that any minister, Chief Minister, or the Prime Minister, who is arrested and is in custody for over 30 days after being accused of an offence punishable by a jail term of five years or more, shall be removed from office.
Such a removal from office can be done purely based on an allegation and a conviction in the case is not required. The law also states that such a removal from the office does not prevent the individual from being reappointed to the high office after his release.
The Bill's 'statement of objects and reasons' states that elected representatives represent hopes and aspirations of the people of India". "It is expected that they rise above political interests and act only in the public interest and for the welfare of people. It is expected that the character and conduct of Ministers holding the office should be beyond any ray of suspicion," it says.
"A Minister, who is facing allegation of serious criminal offences, arrested and detained in custody, may thwart or hinder the canons of constitutional morality and principles of good governance and eventually diminish the constitutional trust reposed by people in him," the draft legislation says.
"There is, however, no provision under the Constitution for removal of a Minister who is arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges," it notes.
Opposition's Objection
The Lok Sabha witnessed chaotic scenes when Mr Shah tabled the contentious Bill, with some members tearing up the papers and throwing them at the Home Minister.
Opposition parties have been alleging the misuse of central probe agencies for a while, and said this new piece of legislation would only take India closer to a "police state".
Senior Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra described the Bill as "draconian" and said presenting it as an "anti-corruption measure is just to pull a veil across the eyes of the people".
Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee said that the intention behind the legislation was "to retain power, money and control over the nation, but without shouldering accountability".
Shiv Sena (UBT) said the Bill was tabled to "end democracy and individual freedom" and "lead the country towards dictatorship".
AIMIM chief and Hyderabad MP said the "government is hell-bent on creating a Police State". "This will be the final nail in the coffin of elected governments," he said.
Timing, And Centre's Arguments
Interestingly, the Centre introduced this legislation a day before the Monsoon Session was to end. Also, the listing of the Bill mentioned that it will be sent to a Joint Parliamentary Committee, indicating that the Centre is in no hurry to get the Bill passed. While contentious legislation are often forwarded to House panels for a closer look, rarely does the Centre propose it while listing a Bill.
The Chair has now decided to get the Bill examined by a Joint Committee comprising 21 members of the Lok Sabha and 10 Members of the Rajya Sabha, cutting across party lines. These members will be appointed by the Lok Sabha Speaker and the Rajya Sabha chairperson, respectively. With the session set to end, this will be a long-drawn affair.
The face-off in Lok Sabha even turned personal at one point, when Congress leader KC Venugopal referred to Mr Shah's arrest when he was Gujarat Home Minister in 2010. The BJP veteran hit back: "What are they teaching us about morality? I had resigned. And I want moral values to rise. We cannot be so shameless that we continue to occupy constitutional positions while facing charges. I resigned before arrest."
How Numbers Stack Up
A constitutional amendment Bill needs to be passed by a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament before it goes to the President for assent. Currently, the Lok Sabha has 542 members. For a two-thirds majority, a minimum of 361 votes are needed. This is quite a leap for the NDA, which has a strength of 293. Even if the non-aligned parties back the government, it still won't have the required numbers.
In the Rajya Sabha, the situation is the same. The Upper House has 239 members now, and the Bill would need the support of 160 for a two-thirds majority. The NDA has 132 votes, much lower than the target. The bottom line is that the Bill won't clear the Parliament without the Opposition's support.
Hypothetically, even if the Bill clears the Parliament, there is a long road ahead. This Bill affects the federal structure of the country and will require the approval of at least half the states and Union Territories. However, this may not be a problem for the BJP, which rules most states.
Also, the Bill can be challenged in the Supreme Court as several MPs have said it runs against the basic structure of the Constitution and challenges the 'innocent until proven guilty' principle.
The Optics Game
With so many roadblocks, one wonders why the government would introduce such a law. The answer could be a perception battle.
The Opposition has been trying to corner the government over the Special Intensive Revision in Bihar and Congress's allegations of 'vote theft'.
Against this backdrop, the Opposition's protest against this legislation would be projected by the government as a reluctance to scuttle an anti-corruption move and block a shift towards cleaner politics.
The Opposition is also likely to boycott the Joint Parliamentary Panel, providing more ammunition to the ruling BJP to target the Congress and its allies on their dogged resistance against a law that penalises criminality in politics.
In fact, Trinamool MP Mahua Moitra has said the government does not have the required numbers and claimed that the Bill has been brought to divert attention from the Opposition's 'vote-chori' campaign.
The Government's Goal
When NDTV asked government sources about the intent behind the Bill, they said the objective is to put the spotlight on corruption in politics. The trigger, they said, was when former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal did not resign even after his arrest. When the matter went to court, it was found that the Constitution does not provide any clarity on whether an arrested minister must resign or not.
The sources said they did not bring such legislation right after the Arvind Kejriwal episode because that would suggest a political motive. But with Delhi voting AAP out of power, the decks are clear.
Government sources say that "it does not matter" if the Bill does not become law. "The aim is to put the Opposition in the dock. If it opposes, it will send a message that the Opposition is okay with someone running a ministry from jail."
Sources in the government also countered the Opposition's allegations that this law may be used to frame non-BJP Chief Ministers by using central agencies. "An arrest is made after a process. At any point, the person can approach the court and seek relief," a source said.
