• Home Minister Amit Shah introduced in Lok Sabha three Bills for the removal of Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and ministers under arrest for 30 consecutive days on serious charges.

• The three Bills are the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill 2025; the Constitution (One Hundred And Thirtieth Amendment) Bill 2025; and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2025.

• The Bills were sent by the House to a Joint Committee of Parliament comprising 21 members from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha for scrutiny.

• The committee, whose members will soon be named, has been asked to submit its report to the House by the last day of the first week of the next session, expected in the third week of November.

• The constitutional amendment Bill will require the support of at least two-thirds of the members in both Houses. 

• The Bills have proposed that if Prime Minister, Union Ministers or Chief Ministers, are arrested and detained in custody for 30 consecutive days for offences that attract a jail term of at least five years, they will be removed from the post on the 31st day.

Why the govt brings in new Bills?

• The elected representatives represent hopes and aspirations of the people of India. It is expected that they rise above political interests and act only in the public interest and for the welfare of people.

• It is expected that the character and conduct of ministers holding the office should be beyond any ray of suspicion. 

• A minister, who is facing allegations of serious criminal offences, arrested and detained in custody, may thwart or hinder the canons of constitutional morality and principles of good governance and eventually diminish the constitutional trust reposed by people in him.

• There is however, no provision under the Constitution for removal of a minister who is arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges.

• In view of the above, there is a need to amend Articles 75, 164 and 239AA of the Constitution, for providing legal framework for removal of the Prime Minister or a Minister in the Union Council of Ministers and the Chief Minister or a minister in the Council of ministers of states and the National Capital Territory of Delhi in such cases.

How the opposition reacted to these Bills?

Several opposition MPs spoke against the introduction of the Bills, claiming they violated constitutional principles, targeted federalism, turned the jurisprudence ‘innocent until proven guilty’ on its head, were open to misuse for political reasons and threatened to turn the country into a “police state”.