RJD calls Constitution Amendment Bill to remove PM, CMs over graft charges a 'tactic'
(RJD) MP
Manoj Jha
on Wednesday opposed the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, which seeks to remove PM, CMs, and ministers facing allegations of corruption or serious offences and have been detained for 30 consecutive days.
Speaking to ANI, Jha described it as a "tactic" that wherever BJP can't win elections, it will not indulge in horse-trading, but destabilise and topple that government through the bill.
"The difference between the accused and the convicted has blurred. The
Supreme Court
had commented about ED that they are becoming a part of the political game. They will slap PMLA cases against anyone and put them behind bars. This is a tactic. Wherever you can't win elections, you need not indulge in horse-trading. Just destabilise them and topple them. I think the
Home Minister
wants to target a few people from his own party as well," he said.
Samajwadi Party MP Rajeev Rai
said, "One more line should have been written in it that either the criminal joins BJP or this bill will be applied to them. The Prime Minister and Home Minister, who claimed to send someone to jail, as soon as they join BJP, they become Chief Ministers and Ministers."
According to the List of Business in the
Lok Sabha
, Shah will introduce the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, to further amend the Constitution of India and the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025, apart from the bill to amend the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.
Live Events
The Union Home Minister will further move to refer these Bills to a
Joint Committee of the Houses
consisting of 21 Members of the Lok Sabha to be nominated by the Speaker and 10 Members of the Rajya Sabha to be nominated by the Deputy Chairman.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
26 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Nuclear laws and the role of Opposition
Political parties in India, especially the Opposition, will soon need to take a view on a critical subject with a bearing on the country's energy security and climate change mitigation. The proposal to amend the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages Act (CLNDA), 2010, and the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), 1962 — which in the past witnessed intense debate — sooner or later, is expected to come up in Parliament. With the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance government indicating its intention to introduce it during the monsoon session, Parliament will revisit the issue whenever the Bills are introduced. The plan is to amend the CLNDA and the AEA to address the vexatious issue of liability on the suppliers of equipment and permit private parties in the field of nuclear energy, respectively. The India-U.S. Civil Nuclear Agreement and the enactment of the CLNDA led to a series of standoffs between the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government and Opposition parties — the BJP and the Left parties led by CPI(M). Historical context Fifteen years ago, the government introduced a Bill to write laws for compensation to the people for nuclear accidents, as India was not a party to any of the existing conventions. Parliament was engaged in a lengthy debate, as the government preferred the passage of liability along the lines of international covenants. Lack of requisite strength in the Rajya Sabha, dreadful memories of the suffering of people from the 1984 Bhopal gas leak, the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and the damage to the nuclear reactor at Fukushima, Japan, following an earthquake, provided the backdrop. Sensing an opportunity, the combined opposition pressed to raise the compensation bar on suppliers of nuclear reactor equipment and beyond the immediate compensation liability on the operator. The insertion of the clause rendered the Act dead on arrival. Western country equipment suppliers shied away. An attempt to tweak it a decade ago made little difference, and international response remains lukewarm. In 2007, during the debate around the nuclear deal, questions were raised about whether it was considering amending the AEA, allowing private sector participation. The government then noted that the 1997 report of the Dr. Raja Ramanna Committee had been examined, and a review of the Act had been under consideration since then. Now both issues are scheduled to return on Parliament's agenda. Raising concerns In February this year, the Congress raised objections to the announcement to amend the Acts. It said the move dilutes accountability of suppliers, raises domestic risk, and protects equipment suppliers, reflecting the Convention on Supplementary Compensation, compromising the citizens' safety, and leaning in favour of international corporations. The party also alleged that the move was intended to appease foreign interests, particularly France and the U.S., ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit. Back in 2010, then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stated that the process for compensation for nuclear accidents began in 1999, and such a law was needed. The government then dismissed claims that the proposed law was timed with a visit by President Barack Obama. Now, the central issue is whether the Congress will take a studied stance on the proposed legislation. There is a serious debate taking place outside on the move to build small modular reactors, with many countries vying to have a piece of the pie. The contribution of energy from nuclear power is estimated to be slightly over 3% of the total power generation. At the end of last year, the installed capacity of 24 nuclear power plants stood at 8.8 GW, the government informed Parliament. This was when the country set a target of 10 GW by the year 2000. The government now aims for 22.48 GW by 2031-32 and an ambitious 100 GW by 2047. In the past, the Opposition took an about-turn on three key issues. At the turn of the century, opposition led to a delay in enacting an amendment to the Patents Act, 1970. Eventually, after a change of sides, the Opposition's support resulted in the mandatory amendment. A decade ago, on two other contentious issues, the Opposition stalled laws, one on insurance law to raise the foreign direct investment ceiling, and the ratification of the exchange of enclaves with Bangladesh under the Land Border Agreement. Finally, these proposed laws were enacted with the then-Opposition offering support, with minor or no concessions. Leaders across the aisle walked together to arrive at an agreed position as the governments of the day worked, in their assessment, to further the national interest. Need for a debate Today, the NDA government does not have to look across the aisle for support. The current issues have long-term implications, and there is a need for a well-rounded discussion that takes into account all factors around nuclear energy, the shift towards small modular reactors, the larger question of disposal of nuclear waste, and allied subjects. The Opposition should play a leading role in initiating this discussion and decide accordingly. Otherwise, during a debate on a contentious issue two decades ago, a member on the Treasury Benches remarked to another member of the Opposition that a change of sides should not result in a change of stand. K. V. Prasad is a senior Delhi-based journalist and authored a book Indian Parliament Shaping Foreign Policy
The Hindu
26 minutes ago
- The Hindu
With real money gaming ban, govt. breaks off from self-regulation attempts
The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025, which was passed in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday (August 20, 2025), marks a major and sudden departure for the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology from its earlier approach of nudging the real money gaming (RMG) industry to self-regulate. The industry, which counts large firms like Dream11, MPL and PokerBaazi, has largely maintained public silence, but has voiced concern in a letter to Home Minister Amit Shah. In 2023, the IT Ministry announced an amendment to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, to regulate RMG firms, by getting them to set up a government-registered self-regulatory body. However, IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw told reporters on Wednesday the proposals were rife with conflicts of interest. In the meantime, complaints mounted from MPs and social organisations, Mr. Vaishnaw said, about the toll that RMG platforms were exerting on their constituents and families around the country. 'This was across party lines,' Mr. Vaishnaw said. 'In every State we were hearing these complaints.' Similar pan-partisan tensions preceded the decision by the GST Council in 2023, when a 28% tax was slapped on all deposits in RMG platforms at face value, as opposed to on the commission, as was the case earlier. The RMG industry has successfully stalled or fought off State-level bans, thanks to the courts' settled view that games of 'skill,' where a player's experience and smarts can influence the outcome far more than luck, do not constitute gambling. Since States are restricted by the Constitution on regulating games that are not legally recognised as gambling, the Union government holds the cards. And until Wednesday, it appeared that a light-touch regime would prevail. With this Bill, the government seeks to render the skill-chance binary moot, presenting the RMG industry with perhaps its final shot at legitimacy at the courts. If the courts do not side in the government's favour, the state would continue to have yet another policy tool at its disposal: the rumoured so-called sin tax GST rate of 40%, which would further strain the industry's ability to remain an enticing option for people who want to play to win money. 'Litigation is inevitable,' Meghna Bal, founder of the tech policy think tank Esya Centre said, 'as this law fails the test of proportionality under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.' Ms. Bal argued that the 2023 IT Rules amendment was a feasible way to regulate the sector. 'There is no rational connection between the law and the purpose it seeks to serve, as it only opens up the market further for illegal offshore platforms that are driving financial losses.' The Bill also provides explicit clarity to esports firms, which offer competition-based video games, with real life tournaments gaining increasing interest and viewership in India. An 'authority' would be established by the IT Ministry that would register esports firms as well as determine whether a given platform is an 'online money game' or not.
The Hindu
26 minutes ago
- The Hindu
A historic move, but still unequal
Hoping to bring down the curtain on the three-decade-old struggle for internal reservation, the Karnataka government on Tuesday agreed on a matrix for slicing up the overall 17% reservation for the Scheduled Castes (SCs) in the State. The Madiga community (Dalit left), who led the struggle from the front, will now get a 6% share in the overall matrix. The relatively better-off Dalit right (Holeya) group will receive 6%, while the 'less backward' communities of Lambanis, Bhovis, Korama, and Koracha — along with 59 microscopic communities — have been allocated 5%. The demand for internal reservation, which gained momentum over the past decade and a half, received judicial clearance last August, when the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of creating a matrix within the larger SC quota. In Karnataka, 101 castes have been notified as SCs. The government mostly relied on the recommendations of the one-man commission headed by retired judge H.N. Nagamohan Das, who submitted a report on August 4. The report recommended classifications following a two-month house-to-house survey, which collected empirical data on the socio-economic and educational backwardness of about 93% of Karnataka's estimated 1.16 crore SC population. The Cabinet's decision, announced by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, appears to have been weighed down by political compulsions. While the commission recommended five categories based on backwardness, the government reduced these to three to accommodate the demands of the politically stronger Dalit right and 'less backward' communities. In doing so, the State government let go of Category A, which was recommended for 1% reservation by the commission for the most backward 59 microscopic communities, many of which have double-digit populations and no representation in bureaucracy or politics. The Cabinet also dropped the 1% reservation recommended for Adi Karnataka, Adi Dravida, and Adi Andhra communities under Category E. They have been split between right and left groups. Under the new categorisation, microscopic communities — around 4.97% of the total SC population — will now have to fight with relatively better-off 'less backward' SC communities that have made strides in securing education and finding public sector employment. While many concede that bringing consensus among all groups vying to have a bigger pie in the matrix was not easy, it was believed that in the jockeying for a higher share, the microscopic communities — many of them nomadic — did not get the justice they had hoped for. Of the six Dalit Ministers in the Cabinet, none represents these communities, and there was no voice in their favour. In the final decision, both Dalit right and 'less backward' communities received 1% more than the commission's recommendations. In Karnataka, the Dalit left is seen as veering towards the BJP, while the Dalit right is believed to be with the Congress. The 'less backward' communities are believed to be divided between the BJP and Congress. The question of internal reservation has been an important component of Dalit politics in Karnataka over the past two decades. While the A.J. Sadashiva Commission, set up in 2005, submitted its report in 2012, the internal reservation remained mostly rhetoric as Dalit right groups successfully brought pressure on the government not to implement its recommendations. The judiciary then had also not cleared the internal reservation. The BJP government in 2022 tried to tinker with the recommendations and came out with its matrix that was unacceptable to Dalit right and 'less backward' communities. It also increased the overall reservation for SCs from 15% to 17%. Ahead of the 2023 Assembly elections, the Congress promised in its manifesto to introduce internal reservation. Following the commission's recommendations, though not officially released, Dalit right groups have been vigorously campaigning against the report, urging the government to drop it in what was seen as a posture for hard bargaining. While the clearing of the internal quota is historic, in the end, the relatively more powerful communities within the larger SC population seem to have gained an upper hand, while the most marginalised still have a long fight.
