Age Criteria for being a Member of Parliament - Debate

Partho

"He/she must be not less than 30 years of age in the case of Rajya Sabha and not less than 25 years of age in the case of the Lok sabha"

Some points to deliberate on:

1. Why such a criteria? What purpose does it solve?
2. How justified and logical are the figures of 25 & 30?
3. If there is a lower limit, should there not be an upper limit too? (Like 65 & 60)
4. Should there be any such criteria at all in the first place ??

Let the discussion begin!!

asg

Umm, I guess there's no 'scientific' explanation for the criteria; but I think the purpose of putting an age limit is to ensure that legislators have the maturity to address the issues they face - something that (usually) comes with age.

The Rajya Sabha is modeled after the "House of Elders" to reconsider the decisions of the Lok Sabha, so its limit is higher.

Partho

@asg
Valid point. Maturity! We can elect our representatives at the age of 18, Get married at the age of 21, Get selected in civil services at the age of 22-23 but to be an MP we need to be more than 25! Interesting!
What do you think about upper age limit? Should there be some sort of retirement age for our beloved parliamentarians??

Neyawn

Yeah , something like 65 year olds are "overqualified" for the job, and cant apply :-)

Partho

Yeah! They should take up the role of mentors and advisors and prepare the young to face the challenge, share their experience and deep knowledge! "There should be an institute where veterans take regular training classes for politicians"... Ah!!! Wishful thinking!! I know!

asg

@Partho
Yes! An MP needs to be more mature than a voter, an administrator and a married person..

Partho

@asg
Agreed! Here i found a wiki article comparing the age of candidacy in various countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_candidacy

A cursory glance gives the impression that most of the countries have 18 as their age of candidacy!