The introduction of the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, has ignited a significant debate regarding the accountability and integrity of public officials in India. This bill, tabled by Union Home Minister Amit Shah, proposes the automatic removal of elected officials, including the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and Union Ministers, if they are arrested and detained for over 30 consecutive days on serious criminal charges.
Harish Salve, a former Solicitor General of India, weighed in on the issue, stating that the bill was long overdue. He highlighted instances where politicians have appeared to consider themselves a privileged class, seemingly above the law. Salve referenced a past event where ministers visited a jailed colleague, effectively holding a cabinet meeting within the prison, illustrating a sense of entitlement among some politicians. He also pointed out a more recent situation where a Chief Minister brazenly stated their intention to continue governing from jail, further underscoring this perceived sense of privilege.
Salve expressed concern over the state of bail laws, which he believes need fixing, but are unrelated to the necessity of the bill. He argued that there needs to be a constitutional rule addressing individuals holding office while incarcerated. Salve dismissed concerns that the bill could be misused for political purposes, stating that the courts are in place to act as a check against abuse of power. He emphasized the importance of individual liberty, stating that wrongful imprisonment of even one person is a "blot on the Supreme Court of India".
Conversely, the opposition has voiced concerns that the bill could be a tool for political misuse, especially considering the increasing number of instances where sitting ministers have been detained by agencies like the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). BJP MP Damodar Agarwal, however, defended the bill, asserting that "Democracy can't allow corruption to continue". He stated the BJP-NDA government aims to implement decorum, sanctity, and the rule of law, suggesting that opposition to the bill indicates that they are "rattled".
The debate surrounding the Criminal Netas Bill raises crucial questions about the balance between accountability, the presumption of innocence, and the potential for political maneuvering. While proponents argue it is a necessary step to cleanse politics and ensure public trust, critics fear it could be weaponized to target political opponents. The bill's implications for Indian democracy and the potential impact on the stability of elected governments remain a subject of intense discussion.
