Nation

Shah invoked a historical stance from 2013 when Rahul Gandhi dramatically tore up an ordinance presented by then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that aimed to shield RJD chief Lalu Prasad Yadav from disqualification following his conviction in the fodder scam. Shah posed a pointed question: if morality drove Gandhi to denounce that ordinance then, why does he now oppose similar legislation when it exposes leaders—including those from the Opposition—to accountability? 

He enhanced his critique by asserting, “Morality’s standards are not connected with victory or loss in elections. They should be steady like the Sun and the Moon.” He went further to challenge Rahul’s legitimacy in opposing the amendment, saying: “If there was morality that day, then what happened now? Just because you have lost three consecutive elections?” 

Addressing concerns over potential misuse, Shah emphasized that the bill applies equally to all political leaders—including Prime Minister Narendra Modi—and is not geared solely against the Opposition. This universal applicability, he said, underscores the government’s intent toward upholding constitutional morality and public trust. 

Shah cautioned that without this amendment, a jailed leader could continue to govern: “They are trying that if they ever go to jail, they will easily form the government from jail. The jail will be made CM House, PM House…” — a vivid metaphor that underscores his argument for restoring integrity in governance. 

He also referenced his personal example—having resigned from his post upon arrest and not resuming any constitutional office until cleared of charges—as a demonstration of adherence to this moral code. “I resigned the very next day… I did not take the oath for any constitutional post until all the charges against me were completely quashed,” Shah recounted, contrasting this behavior with other leaders who did not resign. 

The bill, introduced in Lok Sabha on August 20, 2025, is currently being examined by a Joint Parliamentary Committee. While proponents hail it as a necessary accountability measure, critics—like those from opposition parties—warn of its potential to enable political targeting and destabilize non-BJP governments. 

Amit Shah accused Rahul Gandhi of hypocrisy—questioning why a moral stand against protecting a convicted criminal in 2013 now translates into resistance against a bill aimed at disqualifying corrupt leaders today. Shah insists that true morality must be upheld consistently, irrespective of electoral setbacks, and that this amendment embodies that very consistency.