Introduction of the Constitutional Amendment Bill

The MoH introduced a significant constitutional amendment in the Lok Sabha. This amendment aims to remove central or state ministers facing allegations of corruption or serious offenses detained for at least 30 consecutive days. The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, along with two related statutory amendments for Union Territories, has been referred to a joint committee of Parliament for review.

Proposed Amendments

• The Bill proposes amendments to Articles 75, 164, and 239AA related to the Union Council of Ministers, Council of Ministers in states, and Ministers in Union Territories respectively.
• A new clause will mandate that a Minister detained for 30 consecutive days on serious charges should be removed by the President on the Prime Minister's advice.
• Chief Ministers and the Prime Minister will also come under the ambit of this proposed law.
• The removal can be reversed upon the Minister's release from custody.

Rationale and Legal Framework

• The Bill provides a legal framework for removing a Minister arrested on serious criminal charges. 
• It aims to address concerns that such Ministers might undermine constitutional morality and good governance principles.
• The amendment requires a two-thirds majority of members present and voting for passage.

Current Legal Framework

• Under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA), legislators are disqualified upon conviction for certain offences and sentencing of at least two years. 
• The proposed amendment differs as it allows removal based on a 30-day detention without conviction.

Debate on Legislator Disqualification

• A growing view suggests legislators should be disqualified before conviction due to delays in legal proceedings.
• The Law Commission in its 170th report (1999) and 244th report (2014) recommended disqualification upon charge-framing for serious offences.
• The Election Commission supported these recommendations in 2004.

Supreme Court Observations

• The court in 2018 highlighted that Parliament should legislate on disqualification laws.
• In Manoj Narula v Union of India (2014), it was suggested that the Prime Minister should avoid appointing ministers with criminal charges.