Emergence of the Basic Structure Doctrine in Indian Constitution

The topic of whether the Fundamental Rights outlined in the Indian Constitution can be altered by Parliament under Article 368 has been an important subject of legal debate. Shortly after the Constitution was enacted in 1950, the Supreme Court of India examined this issue in the landmark case known as the Shankari Prasad case (1951). This case questioned the constitutionality of the First Amendment Act (1951), which limited the right to property. The Supreme Court held that Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights, which are protected under it. The Court argued that the term ‘law’ in Article 13 refers to ordinary laws and does not include constitutional amendments, allowing Parliament to modify or even remove Fundamental Rights by enacting a constitutional amendment.

The stance of the Supreme Court was reaffirmed in the Sajjan Singh case (1964), where the Court reiterated that a constitutional amendment made under Article 368 does not fall within the scope of Article 13. As a result, it was established that the Parliament could amend Fundamental Rights.

However, this legal understanding changed with the Golak Nath case (1967). In this case, the Supreme Court reversed its previous position, stating that Fundamental Rights are of a ‘transcendental and immutable’ nature. The Court ruled that any amendment to the Constitution that interferes with Fundamental Rights would be invalid, asserting that constitutional amendments are indeed laws under the meaning of Article 13, which prohibits laws that violate Fundamental Rights.

In response to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Golak Nath case, Parliament enacted the 24th Amendment Act (1971). This Amendment stated that Parliament indeed has the power to limit or take away any of the Fundamental Rights through constitutional amendments, and such acts would not be regarded as laws under Article 13.

Then came the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), which significantly shaped Indian constitutional law. The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the 24th Amendment but introduced a new doctrine known as the “basic structure” doctrine. It concluded that while Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights, it cannot alter the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution. This means certain fundamental principles that hold the Constitution together cannot be changed, even by Parliament.

The doctrine of “basic structure” was further upheld in the Indira Nehru Gandhi case (1975), where the Supreme Court struck down a provision in the 39th Amendment Act (1975), which placed the election disputes of the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha beyond judicial scrutiny. The Court decided that this provision challenged the basic structure of the Constitution.

In response to these judicial interpretations of the basic structure, Parliament enacted the 42nd Amendment Act (1976). This Amendment attempted to assert that Parliament's powers to amend the Constitution were unlimited and that no amendment could be challenged in court, even if it violated Fundamental Rights. However, in the Minerva Mills case (1980), the Supreme Court invalidated this provision, emphasizing that judicial review is a fundamental aspect of the Constitution, and excluding it would undermine its basic features.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court confirmed the significance of the basic structure in the Waman Rao case (1980), clarifying that the basic structure doctrine would apply to all constitutional amendments made after April 24, 1973, which was when the Kesavananda Bharati decision was rendered.

In summary, the emergence of the basic structure doctrine is pivotal to understanding the balance of power between Parliament and the Constitution in India. The basic structure doctrine asserts that while Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, it cannot infringe upon the essential features that form the foundation of the Constitution itself. This legal evolution emphasizes the protection of Fundamental Rights, ensuring they cannot be easily taken away by legislative action. Understanding this doctrine is crucial for anyone studying Indian polity, as it illustrates the dynamic relationship between law and governance in the world's largest democracy.

Relevant Articles of the Indian Constitution:

These articles form the legal backbone that governs the discussions around amendments and the fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution.

Elements of the Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution

The Indian Constitution is a living document that guides how the country is governed. One of its key aspects is that the Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution as per Article 368. This includes making changes to the Fundamental Rights, which are essential guarantees for all citizens. However, there is a crucial limitation on this power: Parliament cannot alter the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. The 'basic structure' refers to the fundamental features that define the essence of the Constitution.

Although the Supreme Court of India has not provided a detailed definition of what exactly constitutes the 'basic structure,' various court decisions over the years have identified several key features that are considered vital. Here is a more straightforward summary of these essential elements:

The Supremacy of the Constitution means that the Constitution is the highest law in India. No law passed by the Parliament or any state assembly can be above the Constitution.

The Sovereign, Democratic, and Republican nature of India affirms that the country is self-governing and that the power rests with the people. Citizens have the right to elect their representatives, making India a democracy.

The Secular character of the Constitution ensures that the state treats all religions equally and does not favor any single religion. This principle is crucial in a diverse country like India.

The Separation of Powers explains how the Constitution divides responsibilities among the three branches of government: the Legislature (which makes laws), the Executive (which implements laws), and the Judiciary (which interprets laws). This separation helps in maintaining a balance of power.

The Federal character outlines the distribution of powers between the central government and various state governments. It helps maintain unity while allowing local governments to address regional issues effectively.

The Unity and Integrity of the Nation emphasizes that despite the diversity of cultures and communities in India, the country remains one strong entity.

A Welfare State, as defined by the Constitution, aims to provide social and economic justice to all citizens. This goal is reflected in various provisions intended to uplift the underprivileged and improve living standards.

Judicial Review allows the courts to review laws and government actions to ensure they follow the Constitution. This serves as a check on legislative and executive powers.

Freedom and Dignity of the Individual highlight that each person has inherent rights and worth that must be respected and protected. Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution aim to safeguard these freedoms.

The Parliamentary System of governance means that the executive branch is drawn from the legislature, allowing greater accountability.

The Rule of Law states that the law applies equally to everyone, and no one is above the law, ensuring fairness and justice.

A Harmony and Balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles is essential. Fundamental Rights protect individual freedoms, while Directive Principles set out the goals for social and economic justice.

The Principle of Equality ensures that all citizens are treated equally before the law, and there is no discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

Free and Fair Elections are vital for ensuring that democracy functions effectively, allowing the people to express their will through the ballot box.

The Independence of the Judiciary is crucial for maintaining justice, as judges should be free from any influence from the legislative and executive branches.

The Constitution also grants Limited Power of Parliament to amend it, ensuring that essential features cannot be altered without broader consensus.

Effective Access to Justice allows citizens to seek legal help and protection of their rights.

Finally, Articles like 32, 136, 141, and 142 spell out the powers of the Supreme Court, giving it the authority to protect fundamental rights and administer justice. Similarly, Articles 226 and 227 empower the High Courts to oversee local matters and address grievances.

Understanding these basic features is essential for appreciating the framework that governs India and protects its citizens' rights.