Scrutiny on Prime Minister's Tenure: Absence of Term Limits in Indian Constitution
The article examines the absence of term limits for the Prime Minister in India, contrasting it with presidential term limits in other democracies and the established convention for the Indian President. It highlights Prime Minister Narendra Modi's extended tenure, combining his time as Chief Minister and Prime Minister, and questions the constitutional implications. While the Constituent Assembly envisioned parliamentary accountability through mechanisms like no-confidence motions, the author argues that the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law) has structurally impaired this accountability. The piece suggests reforms such as exempting confidence motions from the Tenth Schedule or introducing constitutional amendments for term limits for both Prime Ministers and Chief Ministers.
Key Points
- The Indian Constitution does not impose term limits on the Prime Minister, unlike many other democracies and the convention for the Indian President.
- The Constituent Assembly relied on parliamentary accountability mechanisms like no-confidence motions to check executive power.
- The Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law) has weakened parliamentary accountability by binding legislators to party loyalty.
- The article suggests reforms, including exempting confidence motions from the Tenth Schedule's disqualification provision.
- Another proposed reform is a constitutional amendment to introduce consecutive term limits for Prime Ministers and Chief Ministers.
Exam Facts
- PM Narendra Modi completed 8,931 days as head of an elected government.
- The Tenth Schedule was inserted by the Fifty-Second Amendment (1985).
- The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Tenth Schedule in Kihoto Hollohan vs. Zachillhu (1992).
- B.R. Ambedkar articulated the Constituent Assembly's reasoning on executive accountability on November 4, 1948.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.