- Prelims: Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala, basic structure, Collegium, NJAC, Minerva Mills vs Union of India (1980) etc
- Mains GS Paper II: Judiciary-structure, functioning and conduct of business, Government policies and interventions for development of various sectors etc
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS
- In April it will be 50 years since the Supreme Court delivered its verdict in Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala.
INSIGHTS ON THE ISSUE
Context
The Kesavananda Bharati judgment(1973):
- The case was challenged under Article 26:concerning the right to manage religiously owned property without government interference.
- A 13-judge Bench was set up by the Supreme Court, the biggest so far, to hear the case.
- Question underlying the case also included:
- Was the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution unlimited?
- could Parliament alter, amend, abrogate any part of the Constitution even to the extent of taking away all fundamental rights?
- The landmark judgment was delivered on 24th April 1973 by a thin majority of 7:6
- Majority: any provision of the Indian Constitution can be amended by the Parliament in order to fulfill its socio-economic obligations that were guaranteed to the citizens as given in the Preamble, provided that such amendment did not change the Constitution’s basic structure.
- It introduced the Basic Structure doctrine which limited Parliament’s power to make drastic amendments that may affect the core values enshrined in the Constitution like secularism and
- Any change that damages the document’s basic structure would be declared void,
Criticism over the developments after the judgment:
- It has been confined to the manner of its application rather than its legitimacy.
- Functioning of the collegium: A body of senior judges that makes binding recommendations on appointments and the transfer of judges.
- Court’s judgment in 2015: It struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).
83rd All India Presiding Officers (Assembly Speakers) Conference-Jaipur, Rajasthan:
- Vice-President: In a democratic society, the basic structure is supremacy of people, sovereignty of parliament.
- The ultimate power is with the legislature.
Foundation of our constitution:
- The Constitution is a product of a collective vision.
- Rule of law: India would be governed by the rule of law.
- Structure of governance would rest on Westminster parliamentarianism
- Powers of the legislature, the executive and the judiciary would be separate
- The courts would be independent of government
- States would have absolute power over defined spheres of governance.
Minerva Mills vs Union of India (1980):
Way Forward
- Professor Dietrich Conrad’s;“Any amending body organized within the statutory scheme, however verbally unlimited its power, cannot by its very structure change the fundamental pillars supporting its constitutional authority”.
- Minerva Mills vs Union of India (1980): Parliament is a creature of the Constitution”.
- Therefore, it can only have such powers that are expressly vested on it.
- Parliament is forbidden from changing the Constitution’s essential features:It is rooted in the knowledge that the Constitution, as originally adopted, was built on an intelligible moral foundation.
- Justice Khanna: The Constitution that emerges out of a process of amendment as stipulated in Article 368 is not merely the Constitution in an altered form but a Constitution that is devoid of its basic structure.
- Basic structure doctrine is by itself unsanctioned to place the Constitution at the legislature’s whim.
QUESTION FOR PRACTICE
Q. ‘Constitutional Morality’ is rooted in the Constitution itself and is founded on its essential facets. Explain the doctrine of ‘Constitutional Morality’ with the help of relevant judicial decisions.(UPSC 2021) (200 WORDS, 10 MARKS)
