Supreme Court’s Stand on Basic Structure Doctrine and Legislative Validity
Context:
Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that ordinary legislation cannot be challenged solely on grounds of violating the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
Background:
- The court clarified that the Basic Structure doctrine, which includes broad principles like democracy, secularism, and federalism, should not be applied to assess ordinary legislation, as this could create constitutional ambiguity.
- The ruling stems from an appeal against the Allahabad High Court’s verdict on the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Education Board Act, 2004, which the High Court found inconsistent with secularism. However, Chief Justice Chandrachud emphasised that challenges based on secularism or other Basic Structure principles must link to specific constitutional provisions.
Key Highlights:
- Limit on Basic Structure Doctrine: The court ruled that ordinary laws cannot be struck down for contravening the Basic Structure doctrine, which is applicable only to constitutional amendments.
- Constitutional Certainty: CJI Chandrachud underscored the risk of uncertainty in constitutional interpretation if undefined concepts like democracy or secularism were applied to ordinary legislation.
- Reference to Historical Cases: The judgement revisited the Raj Narain case, where the Basic Structure doctrine was first used to invalidate a constitutional amendment post-emergency in 1975. The Kesavananda Bharati case was acknowledged as the foundation of this doctrine.
- Distinction Between Statutes and Amendments: The court reinforced that ordinary statutes differ from constitutional amendments, affirming that only the latter can be reviewed under the Basic Structure doctrine.
The basic structure doctrine:
- The Basic Structure Doctrine is a foundational principle in India’s Constitution, ensuring that essential features cannot be altered by amendments.
- This doctrine maintains a balance of power between the legislature, executive, and judiciary, protecting core constitutional values like democracy, secularism, and federalism.
Key Takeaways:
- Purpose: Safeguards fundamental features of the Constitution from amendments.
- Origins: Established in the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case, defining limits on Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
- Judicial Impact: Reinforced in landmark cases, including Minerva Mills (1980), which restricted Parliament from altering essential constitutional elements.
Evolution of the doctrine:
- Shankari Prasad (1951): Allowed Parliament to amend fundamental rights.
- Golak Nath (1967): Limited Parliament’s amendment power, protecting fundamental rights.
- Kesavananda Bharati (1973) introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine, marking the judiciary’s role in safeguarding constitutional principles.
Core Principles of the Doctrine:
- Rule of Law & Fundamental Rights: Ensures individual freedoms and government accountability.
- Separation of Powers: Maintains checks and balances across branches.
- Federalism: Protects the distribution of power between central and state governments.
Conclusion:
- The doctrine serves as a constitutional safeguard, preventing arbitrary changes that could disrupt India’s democratic and federal framework. Through landmark cases, the Supreme Court has upheld this doctrine, ensuring that India’s constitutional essence remains stable amidst political shifts.
Related Posts
Nagorno Karabakh Region
Posted on
Why the World Needs Peace in Ukraine
Posted on