Source: The post “All ethical expectations cannot become Constitutional mandates” has been created, based on “All ethical expectations cannot become Constitutional mandates” published in “The Hindu” on 14 October 2025. All ethical expectations cannot become a Constitutional mandate.
UPSC Syllabus: GS Paper 2 – Indian Constitution- Significant Provisions
Context: The 130th Constitution Amendment Bill, 2025 proposes that the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, or Ministers must resign if arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days on charges punishable with imprisonment of five years or more. While the intent is to promote integrity in public life, it raises serious questions about constitutional morality, presumption of innocence, and the balance of powers within the Westminster parliamentary system.
Constitutional Context
- Article 75(1) and Article 164(1) provide that Ministers hold office during the pleasure of the President or Governor, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister or Chief Minister.
- In Manoj Narula v. Union of India (2014), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that appointment or removal of Ministers is a matter of political discretion, not judicial or constitutional compulsion.
- Hence, mandatory resignation upon detention undermines the political accountability framework envisioned by the Constitution.
Ethical Intent vs. Constitutional Overreach
- The Bill converts ethical expectations into legal obligations, eroding the distinction between moral accountability and constitutional disqualification.
- As B.R. Ambedkar warned in the Constituent Assembly (1948), ethical ideals must not be mechanically translated into constitutional commands, lest the Constitution lose its flexibility.
- Parliamentary democracy relies on public judgment and legislative scrutiny, not automatic legal consequences for political morality.
Major Concerns
- Presumption of Innocence: Detention without conviction cannot justify disqualification; it presumes guilt before trial.
- Separation of Powers: Empowers investigating agencies to indirectly unseat Ministers, risking politicisation of law enforcement.
- Undermines Legislative Supremacy: Transfers power from the legislature to executive or judicial agencies, disturbing democratic accountability.
- Procedural Overreach: Converts moral judgment into a mechanical rule, weakening the discretion essential to parliamentary governance.
Impact on the Westminster Model
- The Westminster model emphasises collective responsibility and political morality judged by the electorate.
- By mandating disqualification based on detention, the Bill disrupts constitutional balance and converts political confidence into a procedural test.
- It risks turning constitutional morality into moral legalism, thereby weakening democratic deliberation.
Way Forward
- Strengthen Political Accountability Mechanisms: Political parties should adopt internal codes of ethics ensuring that Ministers facing serious charges voluntarily step aside, rather than through compulsion.
- Judicial Safeguards: Any restriction on holding office should arise only after conviction, ensuring alignment with the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and Article 102.
- Reinforce Institutional Independence: Ensure autonomy of investigative agencies to prevent misuse of detention as a political weapon.
- Public Transparency and Scrutiny: Encourage mandatory disclosure of criminal proceedings and empower the public and media to hold leaders accountable through informed debate.
- Constitutional Prudence: Reforms should preserve the spirit of parliamentary democracy, emphasising political ethics through persuasion and convention, not through rigid constitutional compulsion.
Conclusion: The 130th Amendment Bill’s intent to uphold integrity is laudable, but its design risks undermining the presumption of innocence, the separation of powers, and democratic accountability. Ethical governance cannot be legislated into existence through constitutional mandates. In a true democracy, political morality must be enforced by public conscience and political responsibility, not by legal coercion.
Question: All ethical expectations cannot become Constitutional mandates. Discuss in the context of the 130th Constitution Amendment Bill, 2025.
