Mains Marathon

Approach

Introduce the answer with some hasty or arbitrary amendments proposed that undermine fundamental right. Discuss some mechanisms under the constitution which safeguard hasty amendments. Conclude accordingly.

Answer:

Recent amendments have sparked fervent debates on their alignment with India's constitutional core. Notably, the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, raised questions about its conformity with the Constitution's secular values. The Article 370 abrogation stirred discussions on regional autonomy's preservation within the constitutional framework.

• Similarly, the 103rd Amendment Act, 2019, sparked conversations about the impact of economic reservation on established caste-based reservations. The Farm Laws, later repealed, triggered intense debates on their coherence with constitutional principles due to concerns about farmers' welfare and agricultural practices.

Mechanisms within the Indian Constitution designed to prevent hasty or arbitrary amendments:

• Rigid Amendment Procedure (Article 368): The amendment process is deliberately complex, requiring a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament or a special majority and ratification by half of the states.
  • Example: The 24th Amendment Act of 1971 increased the requirement for amending provisions related to Fundamental Rights, ensuring greater stability for these rights.
• Basic Structure Doctrine: The Supreme Court established the concept that certain essential features of the Constitution, such as democracy and equality, cannot be amended.
  • Example: In the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case, the Supreme Court upheld the basic structure doctrine, preventing amendments that undermine core constitutional principles.
• Judicial Review by the Supreme Court: The judiciary has the authority to review and strike down amendments that violate fundamental rights or the basic structure of the Constitution.
  • Example: In the Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court invalidated parts of the 42nd Amendment Act that sought to restrict the scope of judicial review.
• Federal Structure and State Consent: Amendments affecting the federal structure or powers of states require ratification by a specified number of state legislatures.
  • Example: The 101st Amendment Act, which introduced the Goods and Services Tax (GST), required the ratification of more than half of the states.
• Enumerated and Unenumerated Fundamental Rights: While certain fundamental rights are explicitly listed, others are left unenumerated, allowing the courts to recognize and protect new rights.
  • The Supreme Court, in various cases, has recognized the right to privacy and environmental protection as integral to the right to life under Article 21.
• Representative Nature of Parliament: As the voice of the people, Parliament's deliberation and debate ensure thorough consideration of proposed amendments.
  • Example: The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, restored certain constitutional provisions after extensive debate in Parliament.
• Presidential Assent: The President's assent is required for constitutional amendments, acting as a check against arbitrary changes.
  • Example: The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 was controversial due to the sweeping changes it introduced; however, the President gave assent after the Parliament's approval.
• Public Interest Litigations (PILs): PILs allow citizens to approach the courts directly to challenge amendments that violate fundamental rights or constitutional values.
  • Example: In the Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan case, the Supreme Court addressed sexual harassment at the workplace, emphasizing fundamental rights.
• Public Awareness and Civil Society: An active civil society and public awareness can serve as a check on hasty or arbitrary amendments, encouraging accountability.
  • Civil society movements, such as the anti-corruption movement led by Anna Hazare in 2011, influenced discussions on constitutional amendments related to the Lokpal Bill.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Indian Constitution, emphasized the importance of these safeguards. He viewed the Constitution as a living document that should adapt to the changing needs of society while maintaining its foundational principles. However, he also recognized the need to prevent misuse of the amendment process that could undermine the essence of democracy and rights.