NEW DELHI: An expansive anti -corruption bill has drawn criticism from a legal think tank and two law universities, which told a parliamentary committee that provisions linking the removal of a PM, CM, or minister to 30 days of arrest on serious criminal charges risk political misuse.Representatives of Vidhi Centre for Legal policy, National Law University (NLU)- Odisha and National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS)- Kolkata, who were invited by the joint parliamentary committee scrutinising the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, flagged a host of issues, including that it may override popular will. Two of them suggested the threshold for removal should be “framing of charges” as it will introduce an element of judicial scrutiny in the process, people in the know said. Vidhi Centre cautioned that certain provisions may invite constitutional challenges.
Experts: 30-day bar not aligned with current procedure
It said the purported intent behind the bill is laudable and largely complies with constitutional doctrine.Representatives of two of these bodies pointed out that the global consensus, at least in established democracies, for removal of ministers from office is judicial conviction and the proposed law moves away from this and has a low threshold. Existing criminal provisions allow police to seek custody of an accused for up to 90 days in serious offences, and the 30-day bar is not congruent with the current procedure, it was noted.NUJS said the legislation may intend to curb criminality within politics, but it has a “high probability” of severely destabilising Union and state cabinets, sources aware of the details said. The varsity said it has potential to lead to policy paralysis at Centre and states.An investigation can turn into a “potential regime change operation,” NLU said, adding that the bill incentivises retaliation as state police can act against a visiting Union minister after central agencies take action against a chief minister or state minister.Vidhi Centre said, “The framework creates scope for political misuse. Arrests may be timed or selectively pursued.”NLU echoed similar views, saying opposing parties can use its provisions to destabilise legitimate govts. The trend over the past few decades suggests the possibility of its misuse and it will have a negative impact on the country’s democracy, it said. “Automatic removal of a PM or CM overrides the choice of the majority party and the voters,” it said.Though the bill seeks removal from office over arrest in offences where punishment is five years or more, it was also pointed out that there are several serious crimes, including corruption, where punishment may be less than five years.The govt has batted for the bill citing instances of ministers and even a chief minister — Arvind Kejriwal in Delhi — continuing to be in charge despite being under a long period of incarceration on corruption charges. However, it agreed to send the bill to the parliamentary panel headed by BJP MP Aparajita Sarangi for wider consultations. Most opposition parties have refused to be part of the panel.
