What is the Basic Structure Doctrine and how does it limit Parliament?
The Indian Constitution allows Parliament to change laws and amend articles to keep up with times. However, the Supreme Court ruled that Parliament cannot change the core identity of the Constitution. Think of the Constitution as a building: you can paint it, add rooms, or change windows, but you cannot destroy the foundation pillars. These foundation pillars are the 'Basic Structure' — things like democracy, secularism, federalism, judicial review, and the separation of powers.
Constitutional Basis: Article 368 — Power of Parliament to Amend the Constitution and Procedure
Article 368 gives Parliament the power to amend the Constitution. However, in the landmark 'Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)' case, the Supreme Court ruled that this amending power is not absolute and cannot be used to damage, destroy, or alter the 'Basic Structure' (the core identity and foundations) of the Constitution.
Legal Reality & Statutory Framework
The term 'Basic Structure' is not written anywhere in the text of the Constitution of India. It is a judicial doctrine created by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case by a thin 7-6 majority of a 13-judge bench (the largest in Indian history). The court decided that judicial review is part of the basic structure, meaning the judiciary has the ultimate power to check if any amendment passed by Parliament violates these core values. If an amendment violates the basic structure, the court will strike it down as unconstitutional (as it did with the National Judicial Appointments Commission / NJAC in 2015).
Practical Example
In 2014, Parliament passed the 99th Constitutional Amendment to set up the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) to replace the collegium system for appointing judges. In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the entire amendment, ruling that it interfered with the 'Independence of the Judiciary', which is a core pillar of the Basic Structure.
Recommended Action Steps
- Understand that any amendment passed by Parliament is subject to Judicial Review by the Supreme Court.
- If a new constitutional amendment violates core principles like federalism, secularism, or democracy, a public interest litigation (PIL) can be filed.
- The Supreme Court evaluates the amendment's impact on the constitutional identity to decide if it violates the basic structure.
- Keep track of landmark constitutional amendments (e.g. 103rd Amendment for EWS, 106th for Women's Reservation) to see how courts apply this doctrine.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q: What is the Kesavananda Bharati case?
A: Decided in 1973 by a 13-judge bench, it is the most significant case in Indian legal history. The head of an edneer mutt challenged land reforms, and the court ruled that Parliament cannot amend the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution.
Q: Is there a complete list of features in the Basic Structure?
A: No. The Supreme Court has deliberately kept the list open-ended, deciding on a case-by-case basis. However, features like free elections, secularism, rule of law, federalism, and judicial review are universally accepted as part of it.
Q: Can Parliament override the Basic Structure Doctrine?
A: No. Since the Supreme Court held that judicial review is itself a part of the basic structure, any law or amendment passed by Parliament trying to bypass or remove the basic structure doctrine will itself be struck down as unconstitutional.
Q: What is judicial review?
A: It is the power of the Supreme Court (under Articles 32 and 136) and High Courts (under Article 226) to examine the constitutionality of legislative acts and executive orders, striking them down if they violate the Constitution.