Kesavananda Bharati Case

Kesavananda Bharati Case

Kesavananda Bharati Case

Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973)

  • In the Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973) case, the Supreme Court overruled its judgment in the Golak Nath case. It upheld the validity of the 24th Amendment Act and stated that Parliament is empowered to abridge or take away any of the Fundamental Rights.
  • At the same time, it laid down a new doctrine of the ‘basic structure’ (or ‘basic features’) of the Constitution.
  • It ruled that the constituent power of Parliament under Article 368 does not enable it to alter the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.
  • This means that the Parliament cannot abridge or take away a Fundamental Right that forms a part of the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.

What is the Doctrine of Basic Structure?

  • The Constitutional Bench in the Kesavananda Bharati case ruled by a 7-6 verdict that Parliament could amend any part of the Constitution so long as it did not alter or amend the basic structure or essential features of the Constitution.
  • However, the court did not define the term ‘basic structure’, and only listed a few principles — federalism, secularism, democracy — as being its part.
  • The ‘basic structure’ doctrine has since been interpreted to include –
    • The supremacy of the Constitution,
    • The rule of law,
    • Independence of the judiciary,
    • The doctrine of separation of powers,
    • Sovereign democratic republic,
    • The parliamentary system of government,
    • The principle of free and fair elections,
    • Welfare state, etc.

An example of the application of basic structure is the SR Bommai case (1994).

In the SR Bommai case (1994), the Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of BJP governments by the President following the demolition of the Babri Masjid, invoking a threat to secularism by these governments.

What is the Significance of the Basic Structure Doctrine?

Limiting Political Power:

  • Golaknath (1967) set limits to political power by subjecting Article 368’s amending power to the discipline of fundamental rights.
  • Basic structure recognized the basic identity of the Constitution, which may not be destroyed by any amendment.
  • Basic structure discredits the repeal of the Constitution and authorizes a constitutional amendment, not constitutional desecration or dismemberment.

Wise Exercise of Judicial Review Process and Power:

  • Kesavananda Bharati case emerged as an opportunity for the wise exercise of co-constituent power by the Supreme Court.
  • It articulated vast plenary powers of the executive and legislature and repudiated the argument of fear by holding that the possibility of abuse of power is no ground for its non-conferment.

Last Word Resting with the Supreme Court:

  • The Court feels that it has a responsibility to identify and uphold fundamental principles, which are crucial to maintaining the integrity of the Constitution.
  • The decision in the NJAC case (2015) makes it compellingly clear that the power may be exercised only “within the parameters of the law, nothing more and nothing less” and the validity of amendments “cannot be tested on opinions, however strong or vividly expressed”.
  • Judicial independence is important as the “essence” of rule of law, which embeds both “decisional autonomy” and “institutional autonomy”.

Constitutional Conventions and Practices:

  • Rule of law means that the “parameters of decision making and discretion” remain always circumscribed by the Constitution and demands respect for “constitutional conventions”.
  • A convention according to the Chief Justice of India in matters of judicial appointments has existed since the Government of India Act, 1935.
  • “Constitutional conventions and practices” mark the intersection of the unwritten Constitution with the written text.

What are the Issues?

No Such Provision:

  • The most common issue of the basic structure doctrine is that there has been no basis for the doctrine in the language of the Constitution.
  • There is an absence of a provision that can stipulate that the Constitution has a basic structure beyond the competence of amending power.

Against Separation of Power:

  • This principle visualizes a tripartite system where the powers are delegated and distributed among three organs outlining their jurisdiction each.
  • It is inconsistent with the concept of separation of power.

Subjective Matter:

  • It is seen that the basic structure doctrine gets defined differently by different judges based on their subjective satisfaction.
  • This leaves the decision to decide the validity or invalidity of Constitutional Amendments influenced by the personal preferences of judges who then acquire the power to amend the Constitution.

Limitations on Powers of Elected Parliament:

  • A law made by Parliament can be declared null and void by the Courts if courts consider it against basic structure of the Constitution.
  • It gives power to the judiciary and allows it to impose its philosophy on a government that is formed democratically.

No Clear Definition:

  • The lack of a definite explanation as to what constitutes the basic structure thereby leaves the doctrine ambiguous.
  • It is up to the Courts to decide what constitutes basic structure.

Leads to Judicial Overreach:

  • National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was unanimously enacted as an amendment to the constitution by the Parliament and passed by the legislature of twenty [out of twenty-eight] States in India.
  • However, the basic structures doctrine is used in cases regarded as incidents of judicial overreach, like the NJAC bill.

Conclusion

The Basic Structure Doctrine is a cornerstone of the Indian Constitution, which has been instrumental in ensuring the preservation of the fundamental principles of democracy and protecting the rights of citizens. Its establishment in the Kesavananda Bharati case is a testament to the strength and resilience of India’s democratic institutions and the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the Constitution.

Related Links:

IR Coelho CaseIndra Sawhney case
Maneka Gandhi vs Union of IndiaS.R. Bommai vs Union of India 
×