---

The 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill: A Crossroads for Indian Democracy

On August 20, 2025, the Indian government introduced the 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill in Parliament—a sweeping proposal that mandates the automatic removal of Prime Ministers, Chief Ministers, and Ministers if they are detained for 30 consecutive days under charges punishable by five years or more, even without a conviction . Proponents say it's a bold move to curb criminalisation in politics, but critics—including prominent leaders across states and parties—see it as dangerous and anti-democratic. Let’s unpack the details.

---

Bill Highlights and Government Rationale

What the Bill Proposes:

• Article 75 (Union Ministers, including PM): Removal by President if detained 30 days; office ceases if resignation not tendered .
• Article 164 (State Ministers and CMs): Removal by Governor based on CM’s advice—or auto-cessation after 30 days .
• Article 239AA (Delhi NCT Ministers): Same removal clause applies to Delhi ministers .

Government’s Intent:

Justifies the move as necessary to preserve constitutional morality and public trust in governance, by ensuring that individuals facing serious criminal allegations do not remain in power .

---

Supportive Voices

• Prime Minister Narendra Modi accused the RJD, Congress, and Left of opposing the bill to shield "corrupt" leaders from accountability, and underlined that no one, even in jail, should retain power .
• Chirag Paswan, LJP president, echoed this, suggesting parties like RJD and Congress oppose the bill to protect their leaders and political interests .

---

Voices of Opposition

Federalism & Democratic Structure

• West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee condemned the bill as beyond a “super-Emergency,” calling it a “Hitlerian assault on the soul of Indian democracy.” She warned it would erode federalism, weaken judicial independence, and centralize power in the hands of unelected agencies .
• CPI(ML) leader Dipankar Bhattacharya labeled the amendment a death knell for India's federal democracy, warning it is a targeted conspiracy to destabilize non-BJP governments via misuse of agencies like the ED, CBI, and NIA .
• Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan called it a “neo-fascist” strategy aimed at political vendetta. He argued that the amendment subverts federal rights and allows governors undue influence over state legislatures .
• AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi denounced it as a violation of federalism, separation of powers, and due process. He warned the bill gives executive agencies unchecked powers to act as judge, jury, and executioner .

Natural Justice & Rule of Law

• Opposition MPs, including from TMC, staged dramatic protests in Parliament. They tore bill copies, invoking India's "Gestapo moment"—a violent disruption of the institution of democracy .
• Asaduddin Owaisi raised concerns that the bill violates the presumption of innocence and could be misused to remove elected governments without judicial conviction .
• Bishwajit Bhattacharyya argued the bill transforms governance from the “rule of law” into “rule by law,” undermining constitutional norms and treating ministers as redundant functionaries .
• Mayawati, BSP leader, warned the bill severely weakens democracy, and cited fears it will be misused by ruling parties for political gain .

---

Summary Table

Proponents' Argument	Opponents' Concern
Ensures integrity in governance	Violates presumption of innocence
Removes corrupt ministers swiftly	Centralizes executive power and weakens federalism
Prevents stalled governance due to detention	Threatens judicial independence and democratic structure
Acts as a deterrent to political criminality	Easily weaponized for political vendetta

---

Conclusion

The 130th Amendment Bill has emerged as a flashpoint in Indian governance—sparking fervent debate over the nature of democracy, due process, and federal balance. Its supporters see it as a necessary firm action to uphold ethical governance, while critics perceive it as a dangerous overreach threatening the constitutional foundations of the Republic. As it moves through Parliamentary scrutiny, including a Joint Parliamentary Committee, the fate of Indian democracy may well hinge on this deliberation.

---