'You Can't Run Office From Jail': Harish Salve Advocates 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill

New Delhi: Former Solicitor General of India and Senior Advocate Harish Salve has expressed strong support for the 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, stating that “someone can’t run an office from jail.” 

Speaking exclusively to Republic Media Network’s Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami, Harish Salve explained why the bill, which can disqualify the sitting Prime Minister, Ministers and Chief Ministers, while in jail, is necessary to preserve democratic values and public trust.

Upholding Constitutional Values

Senior Advocate Harish Salve argued that public office is a sacred duty, not a personal entitlement. “Leaders opposing this think, ‘I have earned this office. You can’t take it away from me just because I’m arrested',” he said. He cited the Jain Hawala case, noting how BJP Stalwart LK Advani resigned from his parliamentary post when only charged, stating, “I’m resigning now. I will come back the day my name is clear.” In contrast, Salve mentioned the case of Lalu Prasad Yadav, where his wife Rabri Devi assumed the Chief Minister’s office while he was jailed, calling it “an abuse of democracy…if you’re not the CM, it doesn’t mean you put someone else in the office and run it from jail.”

Drawing a comparison between these cases, Salve observed a decline in constitutional norms, “What we have seen, therefore, is a sharp decline in values from the day people said, ‘if there’s a charge against me, I will first clear the charge’ to the day they say, ‘so what if I’m in jail. In my own subjective opinion, I’m innocent. Therefore, why should I leave the office?’ ”

Preservation of Public Trust

Harish Salve highlighted that allowing jailed officials to hold office undermines public confidence. He said, “If you’re going to work according to the Constitution, then how can a man who’s sitting in jail, refused bail by the highest court, run the CM’s office and maintain public confidence?” He stressed that even short-term jail durations, such as 30 days, cannot justify maintaining office, “Maybe 30 days is too short, that is fine. But in principle, how can you say that I will be in jail but still maintain my position?”

Moral Responsibility vs. Legal Framework

Addressing the argument that moral responsibility should determine office-holding, Harish Salve asked, “Then why are we disqualifying a convicted criminal?” He emphasized that the Constitution provides mechanisms to balance accountability and fairness. Elections allow a person to return to office if they are cleared and win the mandate.

Harish Salve also clarified the legal principle behind the amendment, stating, “Resumption of innocence is on the basis on which the trial is conducted. You do not have to prove your innocence, but the prosecution should prove you guilty.” He warned that ignoring such provisions could erode democratic norms, “If you allow constitutional values to be put on hold, you’ll lose democracy.”

Responding to concerns about misuse of the law, Harish Salve noted, “When a common man is arrested, nobody cares. But when netas are arrested, then the government is corrupt. We know how much we struggle to get bail for a common man, but why should netas be given this privilege?” 

Harish Salve’s remarks underline the need for the 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill to safeguard constitutional principles, ensure accountability, and reinforce public confidence in democratic institutions.

ALSO READ: 'Govt Employee Loses Job,...But PMs, CMs Continue to Rule from Jail': PM Modi Slams Oppn in First Response to Constitution Amendment Bill