Mamata Banerjee Criticizes Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill as Threat to Democracy

Speedy Summary:

• West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee strongly criticized the Constitution (130th Amendment) bill, 2025, calling it “more than a super-Emergency” and alleging it undermines India’s democratic principles.
• The Amendment Bill introduced by Union home Minister Amit Shah aims to remove elected representatives like Prime Ministers, Chief Ministers, and Ministers if detained for 30 days on crimes punishable by five years or more.
• Ms. Banerjee stated the Bill threatened federalism, judicial review, separation of powers, and constitutional governance.
• Trinamool Congress general secretary Abhishek Banerjee questioned the feasibility of passing the bill due to its requirement for two-thirds support in Parliament. He also accused the BJP government of using tactics like ED interventions against opposition leaders.
• Ms. Mamata Banerjee pledged resistance against what she termed as efforts to silence judicial scrutiny and trample people’s rights under authoritarian strategies resembling past fascist regimes.

Indian Opinion Analysis:

The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill has sparked significant debate about India’s future democratic integrity. Critics have pointed out that granting sweeping powers over elected representatives raises concerns about potential misuse by unelected authorities to undermine state autonomy-a cornerstone of federal governance in India.While supporters may argue this ensures accountability among leaders facing serious allegations, detractors question whether it sets a precedent for centralizing power at the expense of institutional checks and balances.

Such amendments could reshape political dynamics across states while inviting broader public scrutiny on constitutional reforms requiring majority approval in Parliament. As articulated by opposition voices like Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress leadership, this moment calls for careful deliberation on preserving India’s foundational principles before enacting changes capable of altering its democratic identity.

Read more: Source