Moral Integrity and the Political Class in India
Moral integrity in the political class has been a persistent challenge in India. Despite the electorate's demand for ethical conduct, criminality continues to pervade politics.
The 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025
The proposed Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, introduced in the Lok Sabha aims to address this issue. It mandates that Ministers, Chief Ministers, and the Prime Minister must resign or be removed if they remain in custody for more than 30 consecutive days for crimes punishable by five or more years of imprisonment.
Legal and Constitutional Foundations
- The Bill draws on Articles 75, 164, and 239AA of the Constitution, which concern the appointment and tenure of Ministers.
- Constitutional morality and legal propriety have been underscored in cases like Shamsher Singh vs. State Of Punjab and S.R. Bommai vs Union of India.
- The Supreme Court in Manoj Narula vs Union of India emphasized that individuals with serious criminal charges should not hold executive power.
Potential Issues and Criticisms
While the Bill aims to ensure cleaner politics, it faces criticism on several fronts:
- Presumption of Innocence: The Bill risks undermining the principle of presumption of innocence, which is integral to the right to life and liberty under Article 21.
- Executive Discretion and Political Manipulation: The Bill's reliance on executive advice for ministerial removal can lead to politicization and manipulation.
- Inconsistency: The Bill creates a disparity between the treatment of legislators and Ministers, potentially deterring capable individuals from ministerial roles.
- Revolving Door Phenomenon: The provision allowing reappointment after release from custody could lead to cycles of political instability.
Statistics on Criminalization in Politics
A study by the Association for Democratic Reforms and National Election Watch revealed:
- 46% of the 543 winning candidates in the 2024 general election had criminal cases against them.
- This represents a significant increase from previous years: 43% in 2019, 34% in 2014, and 30% in 2009.
Proposed Solutions
- Linking Removal to Judicial Milestones: This would ensure that only cases with judicial scrutiny trigger resignation.
- Independent Review Mechanism: Establishing a tribunal or panel to assess removal conditions could prevent executive overreach.
- Interim Suspension: Instead of removal, allow suspension of ministerial duties during trials.
- Refining Offense Scope: Limit the Bill to offenses involving moral turpitude and corruption.
Conclusion
The 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025, represents a significant step against corruption but faces the challenge of balancing ethical governance with democratic safeguards. Without careful recalibration by the Joint Parliamentary Committee, it risks becoming a tool for political exclusion.
