What do you understand by 'Doctrine of Basic Structure'? Discuss its evolution and significance in strengthening democracy. (250 words)
Answers
Answer:
On 16 oct 2015, Supreme Court quashed the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) and unpinned the 99th amendment act from the constitution’s board as it was diluting the independence of the judiciary and hence violating the doctrine of basic structure.
In India, parliament can amend any provision of the constitution and is vested with such power under Article 368 of the constitution itself but cannot disturb the basic structure of the constitution through amendment or any type of alteration.
Evolution:
First stage – Sankari Prasad judgement and ending with I.C. Golaknath judgement
Initially judiciary was of the view that the amendment power of the parliament is unrestrictable because it can amend any part of the constitution even also the article-368 which provides the power to amend to the parliament. But in 1967, Golak Nath V State of Punjab, the Supreme Court adopted a new vision to see the powers of parliament that it cannot amend the part III of the constitution i.e Fundamental rights and thus awarded fundamental rights a “Transcendental Position”
NOTE-The “basic features” principle was first expounded in 1953, by Justice J.R. Mudholkar in his dissent, in the case of Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan.
He wrote, “It is also a matter for consideration whether making a change in a basic feature of the Constitution can be regarded merely as an amendment or would it be, in effect, rewriting a part of the Constitution; and if the latter, would it be within the purview of Article 368?”
The second stage (main stage) – Starting with Post Golakhnath Scenario and ending with Keshavananda case Judgment
– In 1973, Keshavanada Bharti V State of Kerala gave birth to the landmark judgement which pronounced that the parliaments cannot alter or disturb the basic structure of the constitution. It was held that however the parliament has unfettered power to amend the constitution but it cannot disturb or emasculate the basic structure or fundamental features of the constitution as it only the power of amendment and not of re-writing constitution.
The Third stage – Starting with Post Keshavananda’s case and ending with Indira Gandhi’s case
– Although the doctrine of basic structure was given in Keshavanand case but it got widespread acceptance and legitimacy due subsequent cases and judgments. The main evolution of this doctrine started at the emergency period imposed by then powerful PM Indira Gandhi. 39th amendment was passed by the government in order to suppress her prosecution which also extracted the elections of Prime Minister from the purview of judicial review. However, in the case of Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, the 39th amendment act was quashed down with the help of doctrine of basic structure.
The fourth stage – Judgment like Minerva Mill’s case and Vaman Rao’s case
– In the Minerva Mills case, the Supreme Court provided key clarifications on the interpretation of the basic structure doctrine.
Under the limited power of parliament to amend the constitution, two important factors were added-
To keep harmony and balance between the rights and directive principles.
Judicial review
Significance:
Subsequently, we find that basic structure as an idea has developed over years since its origin in the 1970s, with each passing year there has been to an ever increasing extent right being incorporated into the basic structure of the Constitution. Basic structure as we see today is consequently a finish of long periods of legal supervision of Rights and related constitutional structure. Through the ‘rights chain’ we have substantiated that basic structure is a summit of judicial decision to pick the simple best in the rights buffet and secure them despite seemingly insurmountable opposition. In this way, an essential structure is the distillate of centre natural rights, human rights and Fundamental Directly under the Indian situation. Be that as it may, as we have seen the judiciary never gave a solid test to discover what basic structure is leaving the definition so dubious that legal have abundant moving space. Be that as it may, from dubious words like constitutional identity’, ‘basic value of constitution’, we have discovered that dependent on the rights chain fundamental structure would be restricted to natural rights and to those zones of lawful structure that straightforwardly influences those.
HOPE IT HELPS.
PLEASE MARK IT AS BRAINLIEST.