On August 20, 2025, India’s Lok Sabha witnessed a stormy session as Union Home Minister Amit Shah introduced three significant bills, the most contentious of which was the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025. This proposed amendment, if enacted, would mandate the automatic removal of top elected officials—including the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and Union Ministers—if they are arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days on charges carrying a minimum sentence of five years. The bill, along with the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025, and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025, was promptly referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee following a voice vote, but not before the session descended into chaos amid fierce opposition protests, according to IANS and Al Jazeera.
The heart of the 130th Amendment Bill is its attempt to codify a legal mechanism that would see ministers automatically removed from office if held in custody for a month on serious criminal allegations. Under its provisions, the President would remove the Prime Minister, the Governor would remove state Chief Ministers, and the Lieutenant-Governor would remove Chief Ministers of Union Territories, all based on the advice of the appropriate authority. If no resignation or advice for removal is given by the 31st day, the office would fall vacant automatically on the 32nd day. Importantly, reappointment is possible if the individual is released or acquitted, as stated in the bill text.
Shah, in his statement distributed to Lok Sabha members, underlined the principle behind the bill: "Elected representatives must embody public trust and constitutional morality. Their conduct should be above suspicion and political interests must be set aside in favour of public welfare." He argued that those facing serious criminal charges should not continue holding constitutional office, emphasizing the need for public trust in governance.
But the opposition was having none of it. As the bill was introduced, members of the opposition ripped legislative papers and hurled them at the Home Minister, prompting Speaker Om Birla to admonish them: "This is not appropriate behaviour. The entire country is watching. You are parliamentarians." The Speaker’s calls for decorum fell on deaf ears, and the Lok Sabha was adjourned until 5 p.m. that day amid the uproar, as reported by IANS.
The opposition’s concerns run deep. Many leaders argue that the bill, while couched in the language of accountability, could become a dangerous tool for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to target political adversaries. As reported by Al Jazeera, Manish Tewari, a Congress MP, stated, "The bill is against the principle of presumption of innocence until proven guilty." Asaduddin Owaisi, another opposition MP, warned that the law could be used to topple adversarial state governments, undermining India’s federal structure. Critics stress that in India, law enforcement agencies like the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)—both under central government control—could arrest opposition politicians on serious charges and keep them in custody for 30 days, leading to automatic removal from office without a court conviction.
Political observer Asim Ali, speaking to Al Jazeera, argued that the bill "would change the federal contract in fundamental ways, including balance of power between centre and states, giving the centre enormous leverage to sabotage elected governments—and, of course, to the space for oppositional politics." The opposition’s skepticism is not without precedent: since 2014, 95 percent of cases taken up by the CBI and ED have targeted opposition politicians—a dramatic increase compared to the previous Congress-led government, according to a petition cited by Al Jazeera.
The timing of the bill is also under scrutiny. In the wake of the 2024 general election, the BJP lost its outright majority and now relies on smaller allies to stay in power. Some experts, as noted by Al Jazeera, believe the amendment is more symbolic than practical—since a constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds majority in both houses, which the BJP and its allies currently lack. They argue that the bill could be a political maneuver, forcing opposition parties to vote against it and then using their opposition as an election talking point to portray them as sympathetic to corruption.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP have not shied away from framing the debate in these terms. At a rally in Bihar, Modi referenced Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s refusal to resign after his arrest on money laundering charges, asking, "Some time ago, we saw how files were being signed from jail and how government orders were given from jail. If leaders have such an attitude, how can we fight corruption?" The government’s stance is clear: the bill is about restoring accountability and public trust, not political vendetta.
Yet, the opposition’s fears are echoed by the facts on the ground. In recent years, several high-profile opposition leaders—including Delhi’s Kejriwal and his deputy, Manish Sisodia, and former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren—have been arrested and detained for extended periods, often amid allegations that investigative agencies are being used as instruments of political pressure. In the last 12 years of BJP rule, at least 12 sitting opposition ministers have been detained and jailed for more than 30 days, nine of them from Delhi and West Bengal, as reported by Al Jazeera.
The debate has spilled over into state politics as well. In Tamil Nadu, Chief Minister M K Stalin labeled the 130th Amendment Bill a "black bill," prompting a sharp response from Amit Shah at a party event in Tirunelveli. Shah accused Stalin of having "no right to call the bill a black bill as he is a CM who did black deed," referencing alleged scams involving the state’s liquor corporation, sand mining, infrastructure, and other sectors. Shah also cited the cases of DMK leaders K Ponmudy and V Senthil Balaji, who continued as ministers while in jail, questioning the appropriateness of such governance, according to PTI.
Shah took the opportunity to rally BJP and NDA supporters ahead of the 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, expressing confidence that an alliance of the BJP, AIADMK, and other NDA constituents would form the next government. He emphasized the importance of grassroots mobilization and highlighted central government initiatives, including GST reforms and the Pradhan Mantri Viksit Bharat Rozgar Yojana, a Rs 1 lakh crore scheme to provide jobs to youth. Shah also underscored the Modi government’s efforts to honor Tamil culture, citing initiatives like the Saurashtra Tamil Sangamam and the translation of Thirukkural into 13 languages.
As the bill moves to a Joint Parliamentary Committee for further deliberation, India’s political landscape remains sharply divided. Supporters argue the amendment is a necessary step to curb corruption and restore faith in public institutions; critics warn it could become a potent weapon to undermine democracy and federalism. With the 2026 state elections looming and public opinion deeply polarized, the fate of the 130th Amendment Bill will likely shape not just the careers of individual politicians, but the very contours of Indian democracy in the years to come.
