In the midst of voting, JPC examining bill on removal of PM, CMs defers adoption of draft report

New Delhi, Jul 17 (PTI) In a dramatic development, a Joint Committee of Parliament examining a bill on removal of prime minister and chief ministers detained on serious charges decided to defer the adoption of a draft report when voting was underway on each of the five recommendations made by the panel. The joint committee on 130th Amendment Bill had made the five recommendations in its draft report which was circulated to members recently. On Friday, when the committee was voting on each of the recommendations separately, it was decided that more consultations with stakeholders and discussions among members were required. AIMIM's Asaduddin Owaisi and NCP (Sharad Pawar) MP Supriya Sule had submitted their dissent notes but withdrew them after the panel decided to defer the adoption in the last minute. "The joint parliamentary committee unanimously said that we needed more consultations with stakeholders," said panel chief Aparajita Sarangi (BJP). Members present in the meeting said voting on two of the recommendations was already done and discussions were underway on the third when the decision was taken to defer the adoption of the draft report. Interestingly, a few ruling party members had also voted against the first two recommendations. However, these were adopted with majority votes. The panel had recommended that the prime minister, Union ministers and chief ministers be suspended and not permanently removed from their posts, if they are detained for 30 straight days on charges of serious offences -- pending the outcome of legal proceedings. It also proposed an automatic reversal clause if such persons are acquitted or the prosecution does not proceed within a specified period. It had proposed that the term "serious criminal offences" as mentioned in the statement of objectives and reasons of the bill may be defined as "...serious criminal offences which are punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or more". Sarangi said the government brought the bill with the intent to stop corruption and to prevent criminalisation of politics. "This is a national cause. There should be unanimity in thought and expression," she said. She said all parties must come together for something which is good for the nation. Introduced last August, the bill seeks to automatically remove the prime minister, ministers or chief ministers on the 31st day of their detention if they don't step down on their own. The opposition had dubbed the bill a tool to destabilise governments run by them. Most opposition parties had opted out of the joint committee examining the bill. The draft report had also defined serious criminal offences, saying the term should refer to offences punishable with imprisonment of up to five years or more. Proposing the introduction of a sunset or automatic reversal clause, it said the suspension should automatically end if the minister is acquitted or the prosecution does not proceed within a specified period. The panel said the safeguard ensures reappointment and that the suspension does not become permanent for those found not guilty by courts. The joint committee also recommended that cases involving high-level constitutional functionaries should be tried in fast-track or special courts, in line with the Supreme Court's directions. The proposed law should include a separate schedule listing offences punishable with imprisonment of up to five years or more to clearly identify the offences that would entail suspension, the panel said. The bill was introduced with an aim to ensure that governments are not run from jail. If the recommendations are accepted, the Ministry of Home Affairs will approach the Union Cabinet with the proposed amendments and later bring official amendments in the Lok Sabha. Since the bill entails amending the Constitution, it will require the support of two-third of the members present on voting. A similar constitutional amendment bill to provide 33 per cent reservation to women in Lok Sabha and state assemblies fell in the Lok Sabha in the Budget session as the government could not muster the required number. In August last year, Union Home Minister Amit Shah had introduced the three bills in Lok Sabha for the removal of prime minister, chief ministers and ministers arrested on serious criminal charges for 30 days, drawing fierce protests from the opposition. Subsequently, the draft laws were referred to a Joint Committee of Parliament. 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. According to the bill, there is no provision under the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 (20 of 1963) for the removal of the chief minister or a minister arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges. Hence, there is a need to amend section 45 of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963, to provide a legal framework for the removal of a chief minister or a minister in such cases. PTI ACB NAB KSH ZMN