Government bringing bills to 'topple' state governments, TMC alleges
state governments
.
The remarks came as the government is planning to introduce three bills in
Parliament
on Wednesday for the removal of a Prime Minister, a Union Minister, a Chief Minister or a Minister of a State or Union Territory when arrested or detained on serious criminal charges for 30 days in a row.
If any one of them is arrested and detained in custody for consecutive 30 days for offences that attract a jail term of at least five years, they will lose their job on the 31st day.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Tiger reunites with the zookeeper after 5 years. See the tiger's reaction!
Story To Hear
Undo
These 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.
Flaying the bills,
TMC
Rajya Sabha MP Saket Gokhale charged that Prime Minister
Narendra Modi
and Home Minister
Amit Shah
are looking for "new tricks" to topple state governments.
Live Events
In a post on X, Gokhale charged, "When vote-chori is exposed, Modi-Shah looking for new tricks. New Bill being brought today to allow CBI-ED to directly topple state govts for the BJP".
"A person is a criminal only when convicted by a court of law. Until then, they're an "accused". You can't remove a CM/Minister on mere accusation. Arrest by Modi-Shah's Central Agencies is not proof of guilt," he said.
"Interesting fact: In the last 11 years, zero arrests of any Union/State ministers of BJP. All arrests only of Opposition leaders," he added.
TMC Lok Sabha MP
Mahua Moitra
said the bill bypasses both federal structure and judiciary.
"Opposition predictions come true- Constitution being changed by BJP with only 240 MPs. New bill bypasses both federal structure & judiciary - Union govt can use ED CBI to arrest elected opposition CM on fake charges and sack them without proven guilty by a court," she said in a post on X.
In a post on X late on Tuesday night, TMC Rajya Sabha Leader Derek O'Brien said, "In the dead of night, more stunts from the shaky 239 seat Modi coalition as they look for more ways to mock and disrupt parliament".
Union Home Minister Amit Shah will also move a motion in the Lok Sabha to refer these three bills to a Joint Committee of Parliament.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
8 minutes ago
- Hans India
Justice Sudarshan Reddy symbolises humanitarian values in judiciary
INDIA Bloc's decision to nominate former Supreme Court judge as its candidate for the post of Vice-President of India is indeed a commendable decision. From every perspective, Justice B Sudarshan Reddy is eminently qualified for this constitutional position. A judge deeply committed to the rule of law; he has dedicated his life to upholding constitutional values in the Indian democratic framework. Among the pillars of the Indian Constitution, the judiciary holds a critical role. Some judges have etched their names in history through their unwavering integrity, distinctive vision, and faith in democratic principles—Justice Sudarshan Reddy is one among them. Journey in legal education: Born in 1948, Justice Sudarshan Reddy pursued his legal education in Hyderabad and obtained his law degree from the Law College. Even during his student days, he displayed a strong commitment to the legal system, a deep understanding of constitutional values, and a dedication to social justice. He began his legal career in 1971, advocating on constitutional matters in both the High Courts and the Supreme Court. He gained recognition for his fearless arguments in public interest litigations and constitutional issues. In 1995, he was appointed a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, and later in 2007, he took charge as a judge of the Supreme Court. His judgments consistently reflected a reverence for the Constitution, a protection of people's rights, and a firm commitment to transparent governance. He also served as the Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), launching several initiatives to ensure access to justice for ordinary citizens. Judicial integrity and distance from politics: One of the most notable aspects of Justice Reddy's career is his strong belief in keeping the judiciary free from political influence. His landmark judgments continue to serve as guiding lights for legal professionals. His rulings in cases of national importance have had a profound impact on society. Vice-presidential nomination: In today's politically turbulent environment, nominating a figure like Justice Reddy symbolizes a stand for ethics and democratic values. The INDIA alliance's decision reflects their respect for judicial integrity and the dignity of constitutional offices. Justice Reddy is also to be commended for his commitment to democracy. His presence in the office of the Vice-President would enhance the stature of the Constitution and uphold moral values. This role would be a fitting tribute to a life devoted to justice. Landmark Salwa Judum judgment: Particularly worth discussing is his historic verdict in the Salwa Judum case, which stands as a milestone in Indian judicial history. This decision played a vital role in defending citizens' fundamental rights and upholding constitutional values. The Salwa Judum case: In the case Nandini Sundar & others vs State of Chhattisgarh, on July 5, 2011, Justice B. Sudarshan Reddy, along with Justice S.S. Nijjar, delivered a historic and significant judgment. This verdict deserves an entire book of its own (which the author had the privilege of translating and was published by Malupu Publications). The case dealt with the Chhattisgarh government arming tribal youth under the banner of Salwa Judum to combat Maoists. Key points of the verdict: 1. Salwa Judum declared unconstitutional: The Court held that the government's act of arming tribal civilians to fight Maoists was against the Constitution. 2. Arming civilians is unethical and dangerous: Appointing untrained villagers as Special Police Officers (SPOs) and giving them weapons was described as highly unethical and risky. 3. Violation of fundamental rights: The policy was deemed in violation of Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Constitution. 4. Immediate disbanding ordered: The Court ordered an immediate halt to Salwa Judum activities and withdrawal of arms given to civilians. 5. Citizens' safety must be ensured: The ruling stressed that the government must address the Maoist problem through legal and secure means, not by turning civilians into combatants. Through this landmark judgment, Justice Reddy sent a clear and powerful message to the government about the protection of citizens' rights. It was a significant step in defending human rights and constitutional values. This verdict stands as a shining example of 'Judicial humanism' in Indian legal history. Speech on the Constitution's preamble: Recently, in a public address related to a book titled 'Preamble of the Constitution' (authored by the writer), Justice Reddy criticized certain senior figures who argue that the Indian Constitution does not truly belong to India. He cited how, even on the day the Constituent Assembly drafted the Constitution, an editorial in the Organizer newspaper openly refused to recognize the tricolour flag and the Constitution. They declared that they would neither accept it nor follow it. Justice Reddy, referring to such intellectuals, highlighted Dr. Ambedkar's response, who proudly stated that if India's Constitution has been borrowed from multiple global sources, there was no shame in it. 'It is only wise to adopt good ideas, no matter where they come from.' Nehru's resolution and the idea of Union: Before the Constitution's enactment, Jawaharlal Nehru had drafted the Objectives Resolution, a precursor to the Preamble. He envisioned a Union of States, emphasizing greater powers to the States, with only essential powers retained by the Union government. This resolution was introduced on April 31, 1946, even before the Partition Plan. Justice Reddy questioned critics who belittle Nehru's contribution, asking whether they even understand his depth of knowledge—evident in his seminal work The Discovery of India, which explores the Upanishads, the Himalayas, the Ganges, the Aryans, and Mohenjo-Daro. He challenged those who pretend to be learned while unfairly blaming Nehru. Gandhi's wisdom: Quoting Gandhi, 'I keep all my windows open to let in fresh ideas from wherever they come,' Justice Reddy remarked how some people try to create artificial conflict between Ambedkar and Gandhi and then take satisfaction in such misrepresentations. Justice Reddy stands as a symbol of judicial ethics, human rights, and constitutional morality. His nomination to the Vice President's office reflects a broader commitment to preserving democratic and humanitarian values in India. His judicial career, particularly the Salwa Judum verdict, is a legacy that exemplifies how law can be a tool for justice and compassion in a democratic society. (The writer is a former CIC and Advisor, School of Law, Mahindra University, Hyderabad)
Hans India
8 minutes ago
- Hans India
‘Trust but verify' holds the key for improving ties with China
The thaw in India-China ties, strained by the 2020 border clash, is a welcome development. The recent visit of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to New Delhi has resulted in several tangible outcomes, including the decision to resume direct flight connectivity and strengthen trade and investment flows. There are also unconfirmed reports that Beijing is willing to address India's concerns regarding fertilisers, rare earths, and tunnel boring machines. However, our policy and decision makers must not go overboard about the thaw. The two governments have decided to facilitate visas for tourists, business professionals, media personnel, and other visitors, aiming to improve people-to-people and commercial exchanges. In a symbolic move to enhance cultural and religious linkages, they will resume the Indian pilgrimage to Mount Kailash (Gang Renpoche) and Lake Manasarovar (Mapam Yun Tso) in Tibet from next year. Additionally, border trade will reopen through three designated points-Lipulekh Pass, Shipki La Pass, and Nathu La Pass. These arrangements underscore efforts to gradually normalise border-related interactions and build confidence. On the sensitive boundary question, the two sides agreed to establish at least three new mechanisms dedicated to managing disputes. Both countries reaffirmed their commitment to using existing diplomatic and military channels for border management and to advance discussions on de-escalation. The Ministry of External Affairs highlighted that these steps were aimed at preventing misunderstandings and ensuring stability along the Line of Actual Control. Prime Minister Narendra Modi met Wang at his residence following a round of high-level talks with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar. In a post on X, the Prime Minister noted that 'stable, predictable, constructive ties between India and China will contribute significantly to regional as well as global peace and prosperity.' Modi is scheduled to visit Tianjin for the SCO Summit on August 31 and September 1, a trip that adds significance to the renewed dialogue. According to China's foreign ministry, Wang conveyed to Doval that maintaining stable relations serves the core interests of both nations. He called for building trust through dialogue, broadening cooperation, and working toward consensus on sensitive issues, particularly boundary management. Doval emphasized that the special representatives' talks hold 'very special importance' considering Modi's upcoming visit. All these are nice expressions, but the Indian side should never forget the fact that the Chinese are adept at interpreting the otherwise unexceptional phraseology as it suits them—often in a most disingenuous manner. This diplomatic engagement has come against the backdrop of growing sourness in New Delhi's relations with Washington. US President Donald Trump's decision to raise tariffs on Indian exports—doubling them to 50 per cent, including an additional 25 per cent levy—over India's purchase of Russian crude has created new challenges for India. Against this shifting geopolitical landscape, India's balancing act with China acquires added urgency. Still, enthusiasm must be balanced by prudence. New Delhi must assess every assurance by Beijing carefully. The current rapprochement should not obscure the reality of unresolved border disputes (primarily because of China's stubbornness), deep mistrust, and divergent strategic goals. Rebuilding ties with China may indeed open new avenues for cooperation, but it must proceed with vigilance and verification at every step. India should follow the adage 'trust but verify.'
Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bills for removal of PM, CMs, ministers tabled in Lok Sabha, sent to JPC
Amit Shah NEW DELHI: The ongoing acrimony between the opposition and the treasury, witnessed throughout the monsoon session of Parliament, reached a flashpoint in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday when Union home minister Amit Shah introduced the three bills that provide a legal framework for removing the Prime Minister, Union ministers, chief ministers, and ministers in states and Union territories arrested and detained on serious criminal charges. Shah said that the three legislations will be referred to a joint parliamentary committee for detailed scrutiny even as opposition MPs, essentially from Trinamool Congress and Congress, launched into aggressive protests and tore copies of the bills. They trooped into the well of the House, near Shah's front-row seat. Bill is in violation of presumption of innocence, says oppn in Lok Sabha Opposition MPs said the bills violated constitutional principles, undermined federalism, and inverted the principle of "innocent until proven guilty." They warned of potential misuse for political purposes and the risk of transforming India into a police state. Pandemonium broke out as soon as home minister Amit Shah sought to move the three bills — the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025; the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025; and Jammu & Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025 — which propose that if the PM, ministers or CMs are arrested and detained for 30 days for offences carrying a jail term of at least five years, they will lose their positions on the 31st day. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The 5 Books Warren Buffett Recommends You To Read in 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Shah justified the legislations, 'We cannot be so shameless (ham itne nirlajj nahi ho sakte) as to occupy constitutional positions while facing charges,' home minister said. Initially, only Trinamool MPs, led by Kalyan Banerjee, stormed the well. After Congress netas K C Venugopal and Manish Tewari spoke, Venugopal tore a copy of the bill, and Congress MPs joined TMC in protest. Venugopal questioned Shah's claim of upholding public morality, referring to Shah's 2010 arrest as Gujarat's home minister. Shah countered, stating he had resigned on moral grounds before his arrest on 'false' allegations and refrained from holding constitutional positions until cleared by courts. 'I want to remind Congress that I had already resigned before being arrested, and even after being released on bail, I did not take any constitutional position until I was proven innocent by the court.' He added, 'The court dismissed the false case against me, stating that it was motivated by political vendetta. ' Three opposition MPs — Asaduddin Owaisi (AIMIM), N K Premachandran (RSP) and Manish Tewari (Congress) — opposed the bill saying that it is in violation of presumption of innocence, which is the bedrock of administration and a marked assualt on the basic structure of the Constitution. Tewari called the bills 'squarely destructive' to the Constitution's basic structure, arguing they bypassed due process and made investigating officers the 'boss of the Prime Minister'. Owaisi accused the govt of enabling executive agencies to act as judge, jury, and executioner based on flimsy allegations, likening the proposed system to Nazi Germany's Gestapo. Venugopal claimed the bills aimed to sabotage India's federal structure. Shah rejected Premachandran's contention that the bills were brought in haste, saying they will be sent to a joint panel, where members of both Houses would get an opportunity to give their suggestions. The constitutional amendment bill requires two-thirds support in both Houses — a majority that the governing alliance currently lacks. One opposition MP twisted Shah's mic, while others continued throwing bits of paper at him, prompting treasury MPs to rush into the well. MPs from both sides stood face-to-face, exchanging threats, and even after the House was adjourned, opposition MPs continued shouting slogans. BJP MPs, including ministers Kiren Rijiju and Ravneet Bittu, moved to block opposition MPs from approaching Shah. The home minister, however, asked his colleagues to return to their seats. Congress MP Deepender Hooda also intervened, preventing opposition MPs from entering the aisle. Normalcy returned only after Shah and other ministers left the House as the opposition members jeered. When House resumed an hour later, the bills were referred to JPC, but proceedings occurred under tight security, with marshals present. Shah, instead of taking his front row seat, sat in the third row as opposition MPs again occupied the well. Govt sources said that their focus was on getting the legislations passed.
