Simone Lawson
The Indian Constitution grants Parliament the power to amend the constitution through Article 368, which outlines the procedure for doing so. While the Parliament is free to enact any number of constitutional amendments in a year, it must preserve the basic framework of the Constitution. The Supreme Court of India has acted as a check on Parliament's legislative powers, with the power to declare laws invalid if they violate any provision of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has also struck down constitutional amendments, upholding the basic structure doctrine, which holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be amended by Parliament. This has led to a dynamic between the Supreme Court and Parliament, with the former seeking to restrict the latter's power to amend the Constitution.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Can the Supreme Court amend the Constitution of India? | No, only Parliament can amend the Constitution of India. |
| Who can interpret the Constitution? | The Supreme Court is the interpreter of the Constitution and the arbiter of all amendments made by Parliament. |
| What is the Basic Structure Doctrine? | The Basic Structure Doctrine holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, the rule of law, and the independence of the judiciary, cannot be amended or abrogated by Parliament through a constitutional amendment. |
| What is the role of the Supreme Court in the amendment process? | The Supreme Court has the power to declare a law invalid or ultra vires if it violates any provision of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has acted as a check on the legislative power of Parliament and has ensured that the Constitution remains responsive to changing times while preserving its fundamental values and principles. |
| What is the procedure for amending the Constitution? | Article 368 provides for the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution by addition, variation, or repeal of any provision. An amendment requires the approval of a two-thirds majority in Parliament and, in some cases, the consent of half of India's States. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Supreme Court's power to declare laws invalid
The Indian Constitution vests in the judiciary the power to adjudicate upon the constitutional validity of all laws. The Supreme Court and the High Courts have the power to invalidate any law, ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom, or usage that has the force of law and is incompatible with the terms of the Constitution of India. This is known as judicial review.
The Supreme Court can declare any law of the legislature invalid and can determine the constitutional validity of any law or action of the executive in the country when it is challenged. This power of judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers, allowing the judiciary to supervise the legislative and executive branches and ensure constitutional supremacy.
The Supreme Court first used this power to strike down a constitutional amendment in 1967 in the Golaknath v. State of Punjab case. The Court ruled that an amendment that "takes away or abridges" a Fundamental Right is void. However, in response, Parliament passed the Twenty-fourth, Twenty-fifth, and Twenty-ninth Amendments, restricting the power of judicial review. These amendments were challenged, and in 1973, a thirteen-judge Bench of the Supreme Court overruled the 1967 verdict in the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case. The Court held that while Article 368 gives Parliament the power to amend the Constitution, it does not empower Parliament to alter the Basic Structure of the Constitution, thus establishing the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Since the Kesavananda Bharati case, the Supreme Court has acted as a check on Parliament's power to amend the Constitution, interpreting the Constitution and arbitrating on the validity of all amendments. The Court has also used judicial review to protect and enforce the Fundamental Rights guaranteed in the Constitution.
The Constitution's Evolution: Amendments and Their Impact
You may want to see also
The Basic Structure Doctrine
The Supreme Court of India has the power to review and strike down constitutional amendments and acts enacted by Parliament that conflict with or seek to alter the basic structure of the Constitution. This power of judicial review is an integral part of the basic structure doctrine and cannot be taken away by Parliament through constitutional amendments. The Court determines any particular feature as a "basic" feature on a case-by-case basis.
Understanding the First Amendment: Your Right to Freedom
You may want to see also
The Supreme Court's role as interpreter of the Constitution
The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial authority in the country. It is the final court of appeal for all criminal and civil cases and has a wide jurisdiction. The Supreme Court came into existence on January 26, 1950, and is located in New Delhi.
The Supreme Court's role as the interpreter of the Constitution is significant in the Indian political system. It has the power to review and reconsider decisions made by lower courts and the executive branch of the government. Under Article 124(1) of the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court is authorised to interpret the Constitution and act as the final arbiter of constitutional amendments. The Supreme Court can review any law under Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, and 246.
The Supreme Court's power of judicial review allows it to examine the constitutionality of legislation and executive orders of both the Central and state governments. If a law or order is found to be in violation of the Constitution, the Supreme Court can declare it unconstitutional and invalid. This power ensures that the government remains within its limits and protects citizens against legislative and executive overreach.
The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in preserving the basic structure of the Constitution. In the historic Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973, the Supreme Court recognised the concept of the 'basic structure', which refers to the preservation of the original ideals envisioned by the constitution-makers. The Court ruled that Parliament could not distort, damage, or alter the fundamental features of the Constitution under the pretext of amending it.
The Supreme Court has also been involved in interpreting the Constitution with regard to fundamental rights. As early as 1951, the Court dealt with cases challenging Parliament's authority to amend the Constitution, particularly concerning citizens' fundamental rights. In the 1952 Sankari Prasad Singh Deo v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court upheld Parliament's power to amend any part of the Constitution, including those affecting citizens' fundamental rights.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court of India plays a vital role as the interpreter of the Constitution. Through its power of judicial review and authority to review lower court decisions, the Supreme Court ensures that the Indian Constitution is upheld and that the government acts within its constitutional limits. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution has been instrumental in preserving the basic structure and fundamental rights outlined within it.
The Constitution's Anti-Slavery Amendment: A Historical Perspective
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Supreme Court's involvement in constitutional amendments since the 1950s
The Supreme Court of India is the highest court of the Republic of India and has the power of judicial review. Its involvement with constitutional amendments began in the early 1950s.
In 1951, the Supreme Court upheld the power of Parliament to amend any part of the Constitution, including those affecting the fundamental rights of citizens. In 1952 (Sankari Prasad Singh Deo v. Union of India) and 1955 (Sajjan Singh v. Rajasthan), the Supreme Court rejected arguments that challenged the constitutional amendments on the basis that they violated Article 13 (2), which provides for the protection of the fundamental rights of citizens.
In 1967, the Supreme Court first struck down a constitutional amendment, ruling in the case of I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab that Parliament did not have the power to abrogate fundamental rights, including the provisions on private property.
In 1973, the Supreme Court's involvement in constitutional amendments took a significant turn with the landmark Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case. A bench of 13 judges, the largest in Indian legal history, was set up to decide whether Parliament had the unfettered right to amend the Constitution. The Court, in a 7:6 majority decision, propounded the Basic Structure doctrine, which holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law, cannot be amended by Parliament.
In the 1980s, the Supreme Court continued to play a crucial role in interpreting and safeguarding the Constitution. In Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), the Court rejected the absoluteness of the 42nd Amendment, which sought to prevent any court from reviewing amendments to the Constitution. The Court reaffirmed its power of judicial review and asserted that the power of judicial review is an integral part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court of India has been hailed as one of the most powerful courts in the world, with the authority to invalidate both ordinary laws and constitutional amendments to protect the fundamental rights of citizens.
Virginia's Proposed Amendment: Understanding the Changes
You may want to see also
The Supreme Court's power to preserve the basic framework of the Constitution
The Constitution of India is the supreme legal authority that binds the legislative, executive, and judicial organs of government. The Indian Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution by way of addition, variation, or repeal of any provision. However, the Supreme Court of India has the power to preserve the basic framework of the Constitution and ensure that its essence remains intact despite amendments.
The Basic Structure Doctrine, introduced in the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, revolutionized the interpretation of constitutional amendments. The Supreme Court recognised this concept for the first time in 1973, upholding Parliament's power to amend any or all provisions of the Constitution as long as it did not destroy its basic structure. The Court acted as a check on Parliament's legislative enthusiasm, ensuring that amendments did not undermine the core values of democracy, secularism, and federalism.
The Basic Structure Doctrine is a judicial principle that prevents Parliament from altering the fundamental framework of the Constitution. It safeguards against arbitrary amendments, protecting foundational values. While the specific elements of the basic structure evolve, commonly accepted ones include the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, separation of powers, judicial review, federalism, and secularism.
The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution and arbitrated on all amendments made by Parliament since the historic Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973. The Court has the power to declare laws made by Parliament or the state legislatures invalid if they violate any provision of the Constitution. This power of judicial review is a crucial aspect of the Indian Constitution, ensuring that the basic structure and ideals envisioned by the constitution-makers are preserved.
Amending the Constitution: A Complex Process
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No, the Supreme Court cannot amend the Indian Constitution. According to Article 368, the Parliament has the exclusive power to amend the Constitution.
The Basic Structure Doctrine was established in the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973. It holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law, cannot be amended or abrogated by Parliament through a constitutional amendment.
The Supreme Court acts as an interpreter of the Constitution and an arbiter of all amendments made by Parliament. The Court has the power to declare laws made by Parliament or state legislatures invalid if they violate any provision of the Constitution.
