Stalin demands constitutional change to speed up legislative process
In the wake of a Supreme Court advisory opinion on the Presidential Reference, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin pressed his case for a constitutional amendment that would fix clear timelines for governors to clear bills passed by state legislatures. Speaking to reporters and party cadres on Friday, November 21, 2025, Stalin framed the issue as a fundamental test of democratic federalism and state rights under the Constitution.
Context: Supreme Court advisory opinion and state-federal tensions
The Supreme Court’s advisory opinion—delivered following the Presidential Reference—has intensified debates over the roles and powers of governors in India’s federal arrangement. Critics have long argued that governors, who exercise discretionary powers in certain constitutional functions, can stall legislation by withholding assent or delaying actions. Proponents of stronger state autonomy view timely governor clearance as essential to legislative efficacy and democratic accountability.
Stalin’s position: timelines, accountability, and federal balance
Stalin asserted that the current framework allows for protracted delays that undermine the will of the people expressed in state legislatures. He argued that a constitutional amendment is necessary to create time-bound procedures for governors to clear bills, thereby reducing uncertainty and ensuring that state governments can deliver on their agendas. The TMK (Tamil Nadu) chief minister emphasized that such reform would strengthen federalism by clarifying powers and responsibilities within the constitutional scheme, while protecting legislative sovereignty at the state level.
What the proposed amendment would entail
Though details are still being finalized by the DMK and allied parties, the central idea is to establish firm timelines for gubernatorial action on ordinary and financial bills. The proposal would likely involve a prescribed window within which governors must act, with explicit consequences for inaction and a structured process for resolving deadlock. Advocates say this would prevent opportunistic delays and provide governments with predictable timelines to advance policy and development programs.
Political and public reactions
Reaction to Stalin’s call has been mixed. Supporters argue that constitutional amendments are essential to clarify executive responsibilities and protect voters’ rights to prompt governance. Critics caution against hasty changes that could upset long-standing checks and balances or undermine the governor’s role as a constitutional safeguard. Opposition parties have urged a careful, pluralistic debate, referencing historical disputes over federalism and the interpretive role of the Governor in coordinating with the Centre and the states.
Legal and procedural implications
Any move toward a constitutional amendment would require a broad-based political consensus and parliamentary actions, including passage by both Houses and, if necessary, ratification by states as per Article 368. Legal experts say the proposal raises intricate questions about the scope of the governor’s discretionary powers, the entropy of timelines, and the protection of minority opinions within the legislative process. The administration will need to craft precise language that preserves constitutional checks while delivering timely governance.
Looking ahead: a test of federalism and political will
Stalin’s insistence on timelines for governor clearance reflects ongoing disputes about the equilibrium of powers in India’s federal framework. As states push for more nimble governance and clearer accountability, the prospect of a constitutional amendment to regulate gubernatorial action represents a bold move. Whether Parliament and state legislatures can reach a consensus remains to be seen, but the debate signals that federalism will remain a central axis of Indian politics in the coming months.
Conclusion
With the Supreme Court advisory opinion in the backdrop, Stalin’s call for a constitutional amendment to fix timelines for governor clearances is a high-stakes move in India’s ongoing federal dialogue. The nation watches as lawmakers weigh the benefits of expedited governance against the protections embedded in constitutional frameworks designed to balance executive power with legislative sovereignty.
