Shashi Tharoor Breaks Ranks with Congress, Supports Bill to Remove PM and CMs After 30 Days in Custody

The Indian Parliament witnessed heated debate this week after Home Minister Amit Shah introduced the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, in the Lok Sabha. The bill proposes the automatic removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and other ministers if they remain in custody for 30 consecutive days on charges carrying a punishment of five years or more. The legislation, which has already been referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for further scrutiny, has divided political opinion across the country.

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor backs bills to remove 'arrested ministers'. (Image: PTI) | Financial Express

Shashi Tharoor’s Unconventional Stand

Among the most striking reactions came from Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, who once again distanced himself from his party’s position. While acknowledging that he had not studied the bill in detail, Tharoor remarked that “on the face of it, the proposal seems reasonable.” He argued that individuals who spend 30 days in jail should not continue to occupy high constitutional offices, calling it a matter of “common sense.” For Tharoor, accountability in public office is crucial, and he suggested that removing ministers under such circumstances would uphold the integrity of governance.

Opposition’s Strong Criticism

The bill, however, drew fierce criticism from other Congress leaders and the wider opposition. Priyanka Gandhi Vadra denounced it as “draconian and unconstitutional,” warning that it would allow governments to unseat Chief Ministers and ministers through politically motivated arrests even before any conviction. Senior Congress leader KC Venugopal dismissed the legislation as a diversionary tactic aimed at shifting attention away from electoral controversies and Rahul Gandhi’s Bharat Yatra in Bihar.

Leaders from other parties also echoed these concerns. Mamata Banerjee described the bill as “a super-Emergency” and compared it to a “Hitlerian assault” on democracy. AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi accused the government of undermining the principle of due process, arguing that the bill effectively allows ministers to be removed without trial. Critics across the opposition spectrum warned that it could be misused by central agencies to destabilize opposition-led governments.

Support from Reformist Voices

Despite the backlash, some political observers and leaders welcomed the proposal. Political strategist and Jan Suraaj founder Prashant Kishor called the bill a step toward closing a constitutional loophole, pointing out that the existing framework allows jailed leaders to continue holding office. He argued that governance should not be run from behind bars and emphasized that the amendment could strengthen public trust in institutions.

Broader Constitutional and Legal Debate

Legal experts have raised questions about the bill’s compatibility with constitutional principles. Currently, under the Representation of the People Act, elected representatives are disqualified only after conviction in cases with a minimum two-year sentence. The amendment bypasses this safeguard by acting on detention alone, raising fears that it could undermine due process. Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde warned that the law could be misused to target political opponents ahead of elections, potentially turning the provision into a tool of political vendetta rather than accountability.

The Road Ahead

The Joint Parliamentary Committee will now deliberate on the details of the bill before presenting its findings in the next parliamentary session. If passed, the amendment could fundamentally reshape the accountability framework for Indian ministers, making it one of the most significant constitutional reforms in recent times. Its implications for Indian democracy, however, remain the subject of intense debate.

Conclusion

The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, has sparked one of the most polarizing debates in recent years. While supporters like Shashi Tharoor and Prashant Kishor see it as a measure to uphold accountability in public office, critics fear it opens the door to political misuse and authoritarian overreach. Whether it becomes a landmark reform or a contested flashpoint in Indian politics will depend on how the bill is scrutinized in committee and debated further in Parliament. What is certain is that the proposed law has already reignited discussions about the balance between accountability, due process, and the resilience of Indian democracy.

(Sources: Financial Express, NDTV, LiveMint)