Three new Bills were introduced in the Lok Sabha by Union Home Minister Amit Shah shortly before Parliament adjourned last week. These bills propose a legal mechanism for the automatic removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers and other ministers if they are jailed for 30 days on charges that carry a minimum sentence of five years.
The three Bills — the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill 2025; the Constitution (One Hundred And Thirtieth Amendment) Bill 2025; and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2025 – propose that the President would have the authority to remove the Prime Minister, while the Governor or Lieutenant Governor of the respective state or Union territory would be responsible for removing Chief Ministers and state cabinet ministers.
Also Read
Everyone knows who appoints the President and the Governors, so the use of the words ‘Prime Minister’ is intended to only misguide the gullible and those incapable of understanding the mal-intention behind these proposed laws.
The Bills have been sent by the House to a Joint Committee of Parliament comprising 21 members from the Lok Sabha and 10 from the Rajya Sabha for scrutiny.
Justifying the Bills, the government claims that they are important for promoting integrity and probity in public offices. However, the Bills have drawn strong criticism from the Opposition as several MPs tore copies of the drafts and marched close to Shah’s seat shouting slogans as the latter tabled them in the House.
A number of Opposition MPs said that the Bills went against constitutional principles, challenged federalism, flipped the concept of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ upside down, could be misused for political gain, and posed a risk of turning the country into a police state.
No other party than the Congress is better equipped to understand this aspect. Laws like Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 was given life by the earlier BJP government to be replaced by the older Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (1967) or UAPA which was amended and strengthened by the Congress in 2004. Now the present BJP government at the Centre is merrily using UAPA against those same Congress and other non BJP governments in different states.
The Opposition’s concerns are not unfounded if the developments over the past decade are any indication. Central investigative agencies are increasingly being utilised to target exclusively Opposition politicians. Several sitting Chief Ministers (CMs) and ministers in the states have faced extended periods of incarceration. Later most were released without any conviction.
Glaring examples being Arvind Kejriwal of Delhi and Hemant Soren of Jharkhand. They both were arrested when they were CMs. Both today are free men as they have not been convicted of a single allegation or charge framed against them. In fact, Hemant Soren is back as the CM of Jharkhand after he and his party won the recent election to the state legislature.
This amply proves that in a democracy it is the people’s will that reigns supreme. Leaders may be punished in the short term by vengeful adversaries in power, but in the absence of conviction by Courts, they may return to power if they enjoy people’s support.
This was also the case with former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister late J Jayalalithaa. Though she was convicted in a disproportionate assets case by a lower court and sentenced to four years in prison, the Karnataka High Court subsequently acquitted her. This acquittal allowed her to resume her position as Chief Minister. She had been singled out by the BJP to teach her and others a lesson for opposing the party at the Centre.
Currently also, many DMK ministers of the Tamil Nadu government are being harassed and intimidated by Central agencies which are working simply to wreak political vendetta. Interestingly in Orissa however, the invaluable contribution by and internal understanding along with bonhomie of the BJD has managed to keep the misdeeds of the former government out of public eye since the Central agencies have been instructed to stay away.
It is also pertinent to note that with an abysmally low rate of conviction, such laws can only be intended to be misused by the party in power. As a matter of fact, between 2015 and 2025, the ED has registered 193 cases against Opposition politicians, but only two of them ended up being convicted.
There are growing concerns that these Bills’ provisions could be misused to selectively target Opposition leaders, potentially destabilising elected state governments. Opposition parties such as the Congress, the Samajwadi Party, and the Aam Aadmi Party have long alleged that Central agencies like the CBI, IT and the ED unfairly focus their investigations only on Opposition politicians. Critics also point out that the Bills allow for the removal of ministers based solely on their arrest, without the need for a conviction. This departs from existing laws, which already mandate the disqualification of lawmakers only after they are convicted of certain offenses.
The Centre framed the Bills as a step toward upholding integrity, citing the inclusion of the Prime Minister within its scope. However, critics argue that this is just to camouflage the true purpose. The real intent is more strategic than principled.
There exists no police or investigative agency or force in India which has the legal authority to arrest a sitting Prime Minister, notwithstanding what the charges are. Therefore, the proposed legislations appear to function as a political weapon rendering elected CMs susceptible to pressure from Central agencies and partisan governors.
If enacted, these laws could mark a significant erosion of India’s federal structure. They would empower unelected Governors to remove CMs based on mere allegations and without the need for a court conviction. As a result, the political party in power at the Centre will use the Governors to operate more like Viceroys, effectively turning state governments into subordinate branches of the Central executive.
In Indian jurisprudence, the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ remains a cornerstone of justice. The proposed Bills pose a serious threat to this principle. Also, democracy is an ever changing form of government where people decide who should rule when. Leaders and parties that are in power today may be relegated to the Opposition tomorrow, and this could not only leave them at the receiving end of these very same stringent laws they themselves have created but such malafide laws will start unhealthy oppression or vindictive seeking by different political parties at different times. The nation and the voters will be the ultimate losers.
