A joint parliamentary committee (JPC) examining the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill has recommended replacing the provision for automatic “removal” of a Prime Minister, Chief Minister or Minister after 30 consecutive days in judicial custody with “suspension”, though the immediate consequence in both cases would be that the public functionary demits office.Most opposition parties have criticised the provisions of the Bill, calling it “malicious” in its intent. Many of them had even refused to join the joint panel.Introduced last August, the Bill seeks to automatically remove the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers or Ministers or on the 31st day of detention if they don’t step down on their own.In its report, likely to be adopted this week, the JPC has proposed that the term “removal” be replaced with “suspension”, i.e. “ministers facing specified criminal charges should be suspended, not permanently removed, pending the outcome of legal proceedings”.It also defined “serious criminal offences”, saying the term should refer to offences punishable with imprisonment of five years or more.The committee has proposed a sunset or automatic reversal clause under which the suspension would automatically end if the minister is acquitted or the prosecution does not proceed within a specified period.It said the safeguard would enable reinstatement and prevent suspension from becoming permanent for those eventually cleared by courts.It also recommended that cases involving high-level constitutional functionaries should be tried in fast-track or special courts, in line with the Supreme Court’s directions. The Bill was introduced to ensure that governments are not run from jail.If accepted, the recommendations will be sent to the Union Cabinet through the Ministry of Home Affairs, following which official amendments will be moved in the Lok Sabha.