Q. The Constitution empowers the Parliament to make changes in any part of the constitution, but it can not alter the ‘Basic Structure of the Constitution’.
In this context, consider the following statements:
Which of the above statement/s is/are incorrect?
Q. The Constitution empowers the Parliament to make changes in any part of the constitution, but it can not alter the ‘Basic Structure of the Constitution’.
In this context, consider the following statements:
Which of the above statement/s is/are incorrect?
The correct option is D 1, 2 and 3
Explanation:
There is no mention of the term “Basic Structure” anywhere in the Indian Constitution. It was the Kesavananda Bharati case that brought this doctrine into the limelight. It held that the “basic structure of the Constitution could not be abrogated even by a constitutional amendment”. The judgement listed some elements of the basic structure of the constitution:
- Supremacy of the Constitution
- Sovereign, democratic and republican nature of the Indian polity
- Secular character of the Constitution
- Separation of powers between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary
- Federal character of the Constitution
- Unity and integrity of the nation
- Welfare state (socio-economic justice)
- Judicial review etc.
But the court did not define the basic structure. The judgement implied that the parliament can only amend the constitution and not rewrite it. The power to amend is not a power to destroy. Hence the 3rd statement is incorrect.
The Preamble as a whole is not a part of the basic structure but the key principles within the Preamble like Unity and sovereignty of India, Democratic and Republican form of government are parts of basic structure. So, the Preamble can be altered like any other part of the constitution. Hence the 1st statement is incorrect.
In the end, there is no parliamentary sovereignty in India, here only people are sovereign. The Indian constitution has adopted a synthesis of the British principle of parliamentary sovereignty and the American principle of judicial supremacy. Hence the 2nd statement is incorrect.
Explanation:
There is no mention of the term “Basic Structure” anywhere in the Indian Constitution. It was the Kesavananda Bharati case that brought this doctrine into the limelight. It held that the “basic structure of the Constitution could not be abrogated even by a constitutional amendment”. The judgement listed some elements of the basic structure of the constitution:
- Supremacy of the Constitution
- Sovereign, democratic and republican nature of the Indian polity
- Secular character of the Constitution
- Separation of powers between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary
- Federal character of the Constitution
- Unity and integrity of the nation
- Welfare state (socio-economic justice)
- Judicial review etc.
But the court did not define the basic structure. The judgement implied that the parliament can only amend the constitution and not rewrite it. The power to amend is not a power to destroy. Hence the 3rd statement is incorrect.
The Preamble as a whole is not a part of the basic structure but the key principles within the Preamble like Unity and sovereignty of India, Democratic and Republican form of government are parts of basic structure. So, the Preamble can be altered like any other part of the constitution. Hence the 1st statement is incorrect.
In the end, there is no parliamentary sovereignty in India, here only people are sovereign. The Indian constitution has adopted a synthesis of the British principle of parliamentary sovereignty and the American principle of judicial supremacy. Hence the 2nd statement is incorrect.
