Basic Structure Doctrine
Introduction:
The Basic Structure Doctrine was introduced by the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) and
establishes that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its "basic
structure." This doctrine ensures that core principles like secularism and federalism remain
protected. It also underscores the Supreme Court’s authority to review and possibly invalidate
constitutional amendments that violate these fundamental principles.
Key Concepts:
1. Basic Structure Doctrine:
- Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is not absolute. It is limited by the requirement
that amendments cannot alter the Constitution's basic structure.
- The changes introduced by an amendment should not undermine or disturb the essential
features of the Constitution.
Evolution of the Doctrine:
1. Shankari Prasad Case (1951):
- The Supreme Court held that Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution under Article
368 includes the power to amend Fundamental Rights.
- It interpreted “law” in Article 13 as pertaining only to ordinary laws, not constitutional
amendments.
2. Golaknath Case (1967):
- The Supreme Court reversed its earlier stance, ruling that Fundamental Rights have a
transcendental and immutable status, meaning Parliament cannot abridge or take them away.
- It also declared that constitutional amendments are included under “law” in Article 13.
3. Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973):
- The Supreme Court overruled Golaknath and upheld the 24th Amendment Act, which
allowed Parliament to amend Fundamental Rights but not the basic structure of the Constitution.
- This case established the doctrine that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it must
not alter its basic structure.
4. 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act (1976):
- It declared that there were no limitations on Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution
and that no amendment could be questioned in court.
- This was challenged in the Minerva Mills case.
5. Minerva Mills Case (1980):
- The Supreme Court invalidated the provisions of the 42nd Amendment Act, stating that
Parliament could not eliminate the judiciary’s power of review, which is part of the basic
structure.
6. Waman Rao Case (1981):
- The Supreme Court clarified that the Basic Structure Doctrine applies to amendments made
after April 24, 1973, including those affecting the Ninth Schedule.
Elements of Basic Structure:
Though not exhaustively defined, the following elements are considered part of the basic
structure:
- Supremacy of the Constitution
- Rule of Law
- Sovereignty, Liberty, and Republican nature of Indian polity
- Judicial Review
- Harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles
- Separation of Powers
- Federal Character
- Parliamentary System
- Rule of Equality
- Unity and Integrity of the Nation
- Free and Fair Elections
- Powers of Supreme Court (Articles 32, 136, 142, 147)
- Powers of High Courts (Articles 226, 227)
- Limited power of Parliament to amend the Constitution
- Welfare State
- Freedom and Dignity of Individuals
Significance of the Basic Structure Doctrine:
- Protects Constitutional Values: Prevents the erosion of essential features of the Constitution by
restricting amendments that could alter its fundamental principles.
- Safeguards Democracy: Limits Parliament’s power to prevent it from turning into a totalitarian
regime.
- Ensures Stability: Helps retain core values and principles intended by the Constitution’s
framers.
- Strengthens Judiciary: Reinforces the independence of the judiciary and its role in maintaining
constitutional integrity.
- Dynamic: Allows for progressive interpretation and adaptation while protecting fundamental
principles.
Criticisms of the Basic Structure Doctrine:
- No Textual Basis: The doctrine is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, leading to
arguments that it lacks a clear textual foundation.
- Judicial Overreach: Critics argue that it grants excessive power to the judiciary, allowing it to
impose its philosophy on democratically elected governments.
- Ambiguity: There is no precise definition of what constitutes the basic structure, leading to
potential ambiguity.
- Judicial Overreach: Some argue that recent applications of the doctrine, such as in the NJAC
case, represent judicial overreach.
Important Terminologies:
1. Judicial Activism:
- A judicial philosophy where courts go beyond existing laws to address broader societal
issues. Example: Kesavananda Bharati case, Maneka Gandhi case.
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is often used to enact judicial activism.
2. Judicial Overreach:
- When courts interfere excessively in the functions of the executive and legislature. Example:
Regulations on firecrackers, bars near highways.
3. Judicial Review:
- The power of courts to review the validity of legislative and executive actions. Derived from
Articles 13(2), 32, and 142. Example: Scrapping Section 66A of the IT Act.
Conclusion:
The Basic Structure Doctrine plays a crucial role in maintaining the core principles of the
Constitution while allowing for necessary amendments. Its application by the Supreme Court
ensures that constitutional changes do not undermine fundamental values, balancing progress
with protection of essential principles. The doctrine continues to be a cornerstone in the
evolution and stability of Indian constitutional law.
