Editorial 1: ​​​Lawfare politics

Context

The integrity of federal principles should not be compromised under the pretext of enhancing probity

Introduction

The Centre has introduced three bills, including a constitutional amendment, claiming to enhance probity and accountability for the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and Ministers. While the proposals allow removal upon detention for serious offences, critics argue they risk political misuse, centralisation of power, and undermining federal principles, raising questions about the true intent behind these rushed legislative measures.

Overview of the New Bills

• Three bills, including a constitutional amendment, were introduced hurriedly by the Centre toward the end of the Parliament session.
• Stated objective: improve probity and accountability for the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and Ministers.
• Key provision:
  • Any of these officials lose their position if detained by a law enforcement agency for an offence punishable with 5+ years imprisonment.
  • They can return to office upon acquittal.
• Observation: The stated intent of enhancing accountability is met with scepticism by legal experts and the Opposition.

Concerns Over Centralisation of Power

• Opposition and legal experts argue these bills concentrate power in the Centre.
• Although the law claims to apply equally to the Prime Minister, this is questionable, as:
  • All investigative agencies are under central administrative control.
  • Central agencies are unlikely to detain the Prime Minister.
  • Several Opposition Chief Ministers have already been arrested, indicating selective application.

Legal and Judicial Implications

• Police are increasingly eager to arrest; bail is harder due to:
  • Harsh provisions in laws like Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
  • Judicial diffidence in granting bail.
• While corruption is a societal threat, combating it should not violate principles of justice.
• Pattern observed:
  • Individuals targeted while in opposition.
  • Same individuals protected once aligned with the ruling party (BJP).

Risks to Democracy and Federalism

• If enacted, bills allow removal of elected officials by mere police action, without:
  • Fair trial
  • Judicial conviction
• Likely practical application: only State/Union Territory governments.
• Implications:
  • Violation of federal principles
  • Veto power for State Governors over elected legislatures
  • Presumption of guilt until proven innocent
  • Disregard for the verdict of the electorate

Conclusion

While tackling corruption is essential, the proposed bills may weaken justice, disregard democratic mandates, and empower the Centre arbitrarily. The risk of selective enforcement against opposition leaders and erosion of federalism suggests that, rather than ensuring accountability, these measures could undermine democracy, legal fairness, and the principles of justice in India.