Retirement Age for Politicians

There should be the fixed retirement age for politicians i.e. 65 years. Why?

Because not only physically but also mentally a person is not that much creative or productive at an old age. May be few exception like Gandhi ji. But we are not short of the young population in India So, why should we give the burden of young population on old arms. As being a politicians is not an easy task. He has to take major decisions like signing deals, contracts, visiting other nations etc. All this thing require power, good health plus concentration. But at an old age we are not able to concentrate on any work most and most of the time we get health issue which tends to visit hospitals regularly and wasting time which should be given for the development of the nation. So we do not have any other option rather than fixing an age for the retirement. Even we can see for all other profession there is a fixed retirement age then why not for the politicians.

So our government have to think about our country and it has to think about people of our country by fixing an age for retirement of politician. On other thing that can be done they should be given another post like their valuable ideas and knowledge plus experience that should be utilised for the country.

To conclude I would like to say that we should be fixed an age for the retirement of the politicians this is good for them as well as our country. It can help for the development of our country so that young people can use innovative ideas for the the overall growth of people and our country.

I don't feel that there is a need to introduce a cap on the retirement age for politicians, because-

1. Politicians are public servants and as long as the public wants them to serve and is happy with their working, why they should retire? Besides this, if the public is unsatisfied with their working, then public has the power to remove them from power in the next elections.

2. Politicians who are serving good service to the nation and who haven't been involved in corruption in past are a great asset to the country.

3. Public may lose hope in the party or lose credibility in the party if the politician in which they believe or have faith will no longer be there in the party. For e.g, most of the people today are backing BJP in elections, only because of Mr. Modi.

4. The experience which a senior politician have cannot be simply replaced by someone who is new to politics.

5. Politicians may also help to maintain diplomatic relations, who may have an impact if they retire.

6. People have a sentiment of hope and believe attached to a politician, and their retirement may cause anger and chaos in the public. For e.g, take the example of late CM Jayalalitha, people of TN praises her and admire her. Imagine the reaction of the public if she was made to retire before her death!

So, I think there is no need to set a retirement age for politicians, people have ultimate power in democracy and it is them, who decides who can or cannot serve the nation.

Thanks!

Hi everyone, in my opinion, I don't think that the age limit should be imposed on politicians because:

1. Age cannot be criterion for judging someone's working ability.

2. We need experienced people to understand and take some crucial decisions in favor of the mass.

But also we need youth to enter in the politics because:

1. India having the largest youth population (around 326 millions people in the age GRP of 10 to 24) needs more enthusiastic and energetic minds to represent them which can implement innovative ideas for better future.

2. Sometimes it happens that with the same person getting elected again n again some issues do not get resolved because of the same approach/mindset towards those problems and hence we need someone with fresh approach.

3. Old seats need to be vacated for giving chance to young aspiring minds.

But since we want both energy and experience in our system, this is what I propose: We can have age limit at the lower levels like MLA's and Ward members etc. Where people elected can be youth and they can act as the bridge to fill the gap between the mass and aged politicians at the MP level.

This way, these young people can get experience working at lower level under the supervision of these aged politicians and later on they can get promoted to that level which usually happens.

As per our constitution, all the citizen of India has the equal rights to stand in the election. For this criteria, the candidate must be the Indian citizen & the age of the candidate is minimum 25 years. If there is some retirement age for politicians, then in our country the older citizen have lost their right to stand in the election.

In my view, there should not be any retirement age for politicians because the aged politicians have more experience by handling the issues of people for the long period of time. Again a person's ability to serve his country can not be judged by his age. As we all know politicians have to take decision for the whole country, so experience is very much required in politics.

Again if there is an age limit for politicians, then family politics will increase in India. Suppose a politician will retire at certain age, then that politician will promote his son or daughter for his post. So a younger person without political background, can not get any type of benefit from the retirement of politicians.

At last I will say that if Mahatma Gandhi is retire at the age of 60 or 65, then it is difficult for India to get independent. So in India, there should not be any retirement age for politicians.

I think retirement in politics is a very important factor. If you would not keep any retirement requirement then the aged people will not leave their positions for the young generation. Keeping in mind the future generation is always advanced in thinking and working they may perform very greatly. Giving a hold of power for a long time in one's hand may result in greedy thinking and miss use of politics and even if they have an experience they may use it in their own favor. In politics experience of 20 to years is more than sufficient by my opinion. As you will keep age limit in politics there will naturally be young people with courage and passion as well as aged people having experience. Experienced close to retirement may help young generation in guidance.

Decision made by young people may probably based on detailed information which will lead to proper development. (REQUIREMENT:-for which the young politician should be of proper qualifications).

By proper calculation of different age population in India and its probability, you may fix age limit on that basis where you may have proper age flow in politics with young as well as experienced generation. Thus age limit is essential in politics.

Hello friends, in my point of view, I agree with this point that politics is a matter of experience and everyone knows that old is gold but question is this today India has 65% youth in all over its population 1.25 Arab and it is regarded on the world level that a nation always depends upon the bulky pillars and this is known by youths so I think leaders should be retired at the age of 60. I want to include one more point if they are being retired, we should not leave them forever but we'll have to give them a forum by which they could share his experience with us and if we needed some help we take from them. And one more thing, this type of our youths will get a chance to prove his quality and capability. Thus we will not be away our leader and the young generation too. For example in the world scenario a lot of youngsters who had changed the mentality of humans and created a new world they were {Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Napoleon, Sikandar, Swami Vivekanand, Srinivasan Ramanujan, queen of Jhansi Lakshmi bai, Shivaji, etc}. So we should give a chance to the new generation. Have a nice time thanks.

Yes I agree that retirement must be there for politician after a certain period because politician are also human being and after a certain age they get prone to the health related issue and in many jobs there is retirement age because of the same reason so there should be retirement age in politics.

Whilst senior politician would have valuable knowledge and experience generally they more conventional approach which act as barrier to new thoughts and ideas, having set a retirement age for politician would ensure that a person knows reign of power would end at a definite point of time and he may have to answer for any misappropriation sooner rather than later.

Some politician have a wealth of knowledge and experience, which is essential for the role but in order to ensure that one does not remain in seat of power indefinitely. And young people are able to take key positions in political arena, thus contribution fresh ideas and new perspective, it is essential that politicians also retire at a predetermined age.

"POLITICAL LEADERS ALSO MUST BE RETIRED ON AGE OF 60 YEARS." WHY?

TEN REASONS TO IMPLEMENT:

1. Dynasty system in politics will be automatically stopped.

2. Corruption will be reduced due to detachment of "Power Mania".

3. Employment opportunity will be increased in political background.

4. Pressure will be developed in political parties for keeping deserved quality leaders.

5. Minimum qualification for MPs & MLAs must be graduation.

6. Youth will get a chance to work for the country and will fulfil the present generation need.

7. To keep country always young by reducing generation gap.

8. To build peace and to reduce violent extremism.

9. For common working is between 25 to 60 years, we can say it the main stream of the country. Then why not country should run by mainstream leaders.

10. After retirement, we generally think as bonus life and people need to rest , keep good health, enjoy family life, fulfil personal hobbies and guide their young one (on need basis).

Hi, this is Samyuktha.

So, friends in my point of view, that the retirement age for politicians is the best idea to be implemented.

That means if the political leader becomes old then they are not having so much of energy to rule the system. And also they are eating so much of money by ruling the parties years and years.

The retirement age is applicable to all government officers like that it should also be applicable to the political leaders.

That means every political leader must have up to 50 years of age is enough not more than that. After the age of that, they lose their vision capability and energy and feeling some sickness as our political leader like that Chandra Babu Naidu.

So I am not opposing that all our political leaders are not like that based upon their own energy.

The youth leader will have so much of ideas than the old leader.

So I conclude that the government should take necessary steps to implement this retirement age system very soonly.

Hi everyone,

According to me, politics is not a field which requires extensive hard work physically. Instead what politics asks for is an experienced and enlightened personality to make decisions in the favor of the country. A cricketer at 30 is considered a senior cricketer because cricket demands physical fitness but a politician even at the age of 50 is considered an amateur because what it demands more is experience.

Yes, youngster spirit can go a long way in improving our country's political condition, but without the guiding light of experience bestowed upon by the senior politicians, they may go berserk. Age limit will not be a favorable solution to this pity political condition of our country. Instead we should try to strike and eliminate the root of all evils which include corruption, trafficking etc. And then only can we boast of being the largest and the most successful democracy of the world.