Introduction

• The Doctrine of Basic Structure is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
• This doctrine is a judicial innovation and was given its shape by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case.
• This concept was introduced by the judiciary in order to tide over the spate of amendments, which were eroding the edifice of our Constitution.
• It evolved the concept of separation of powers among the three branches of governance — legislative, executive, and judiciary.

What is the Concept of Doctrine of Basic Structure?

• The doctrine of basic structure states that if the Parliament passes any law that destroys the basic structure of the Constitution, that law will be declared invalid to the extent that it violates the basic structure.
• The Supreme Court's main goal while developing this doctrine was to uphold its authority as the highest court and to maintain a balance of power among the three branches of the government: the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary.

How did the Evolution of the Basic Structure Doctrine Occur?

• Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951):
  • The Supreme Court pined that the power of the parliament to amend the constitution under Article 368 also includes the power to amend Fundamental Rights.
  • It based its judgment on the logic that the word ‘law’ mentioned in Article 13 includes only ordinary laws and not constitutional amendment acts.
• IC Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967):
  • Supreme Court overruled its judgment.
  • That Fundamental Rights are given a transcendental and immutable position and hence the Parliament cannot abridge or take away any of these rights.
  • It opined that the constitutional amendment act is also a law under Article 13.
  • Parliament reacted to this judgment by enacting the 24^th Amendment Act which included a provision in Article 368 which declared that Parliament has power to take away any of the fundamental rights.
• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973):
  • The genesis of the Basic Structure Doctrine can be traced back to the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati in 1973.
  • The Supreme Court, in a razor-thin majority of 7:6, held that there are inherent limitations on the amending power of the Parliament.
  • Chief Justice S M Sikri, delivering the judgment, propounded the idea that although the Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its basic structure.
• 42^nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976:
  • Amended Article 368 – no limitation on the constituent power of Parliament.
  • Any amendment cannot be questioned in any court on any ground.
• Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980):
  • The Supreme Court has held that the following are the basic features of the Constitution: -
    • Limited power of parliament to amend the Constitution
    • Harmony and balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles;
    • Fundamental Rights in certain cases;
    • The power of judicial review in certain cases.
• Doctrine's Affirmation in Subsequent Cases:
  • The Basic Structure Doctrine has been affirmed and clarified in several subsequent cases, solidifying its status as a constitutional principle.
  • Notable among these are the Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) and Waman Rao v. Union of India (1980).

What are the Components of the Basic Structure?

The Basic Structure Doctrine identifies certain features as the foundational pillars of the Indian Constitution, beyond the reach of amendment. These components are crucial for maintaining the essence of democracy, justice, and equality.

• Supremacy of the Constitution:
  • The supremacy of the Constitution is a cardinal principle of the Basic Structure Doctrine.
  • Any amendment that seeks to dilute or undermine this supremacy is considered violative of the basic structure.
  • In the Kesavananda Bharati case, it was emphasized that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and no amendment can alter its fundamental structure.
• Republican and Democratic Form of Government:
  • The Basic Structure includes the republican and democratic form of government, ensuring that the people's will is reflected in the functioning of the state.
  • This concept was discussed in the case of Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975).
• Secularism:
  • Secularism is an integral part of the Basic Structure, ensuring the state's impartiality in matters of religion.
  • The judiciary has consistently held that any amendment seeking to establish a theocratic state or erode the secular fabric would be unconstitutional.
  • The court observed this concept in the case of S R Bommai v. Union of India (1994).
• Federal Structure:
  • The federal structure of the Constitution, balancing power between the center and states, is considered a basic feature.
  • Any attempt to disrupt this balance would be seen as an assault on the basic structure.
• Separation of Powers:
  • The Basic Structure includes the separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.
  • Amendments that infringe this delicate balance and concentrate power excessively in one branch are vulnerable to judicial scrutiny.
• Judicial Review:
  • Judicial review is an inherent part of the Indian Constitution, allowing the judiciary to review the actions of the executive and legislative branches.
• Independent Judiciary:
  • An independent judiciary serves as a check on the powers of the executive and legislative branches of government.
  • It ensures that these branches do not exceed their constitutional authority and act in accordance with the rule of law.
  • The judiciary is often seen as the guardian of the constitution. Its role includes interpreting the constitution, resolving constitutional disputes, and ensuring that government actions comply with constitutional principles.
  • In the matter of SC Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015), the SC nullified the constitutionality of the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014 (NJAC) to uphold the independence of judiciary in appointments of judges of SC and High Courts.

Conclusion

The basic structure doctrine strikes a fine balance between flexibility and rigidity, which should be present in the power to amend any Constitution. Today, there is no disagreement over the existence of the doctrine itself. The only issue that arises repeatedly is the specifics or contents of the doctrine. Certain elements of the doctrine have been reaffirmed repeatedly by the Courts, whereas some aspects are still being deliberated upon and discussed.