Protecting Fundamental Rights: The Role of the Supreme Court
Can the Constitution of India be Amended to Infringe upon Fundamental Rights? - Madras Law Forum
The Evolving Nature of the Constitution
The Constitution of India, a foundational document enshrining the fundamental rights of its citizens, is not immutable. Article 368 of the Constitution provides the mechanism for its amendment, allowing for changes to adapt to the evolving needs and aspirations of the nation. However, this amendment power is not absolute and is subject to certain limitations.
Fundamental Rights: Cornerstones of the Constitution
Fundamental rights, guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution, are the bedrock of Indian democracy. These rights, including the right to equality, liberty, and life, are considered essential for the development of individuals and the nation as a whole.
Limitations on Amendment Power
While Article 368 empowers the Parliament to amend the Constitution, there are certain limitations that prevent it from infringing upon fundamental rights:
- Basic Structure Doctrine: The Supreme Court has evolved the basic structure doctrine, which holds that certain core features of the Constitution, including fundamental rights, cannot be altered through amendments. These features are considered essential to the democratic character of the Constitution and cannot be compromised.
- Prohibition Against Taking Away Fundamental Rights: Article 33 of the Constitution allows the Parliament to restrict the application of fundamental rights to members of the armed forces, police, and other uniformed services in the interest of national security. However, this restriction cannot be used to completely take away fundamental rights.
- Judicial Review: The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review, which enables it to examine the constitutionality of laws and amendments. If the Court finds that an amendment infringes upon fundamental rights, it can declare it unconstitutional.
Case Law and Interpretations
The Supreme Court has played a pivotal role in interpreting the scope of Article 368 and the limitations on the amendment power. Notable cases that have shaped the jurisprudence on this issue include:
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): This landmark case established the basic structure doctrine, recognizing certain core features of the Constitution as unamendable.
- Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980): The Court reaffirmed the basic structure doctrine and held that the amendment power cannot be used to curtail the judiciary's role in upholding fundamental rights.
- Waman Rao v. Union of India (1980): The Court emphasized that while the Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot do so in a manner that defeats its basic purpose or destroys its essential features.
Read More
- Can I seek legal remedies or damages for infringement of my intellectual property rights?
- What is Intellectual property law? How to find the Best Attorney?
- What is International Law and Its Relevance in India?
- Can individuals seek remedies through international human rights mechanisms?
- Can the Constitution of India be amended to alter the basic structure of the Constitution?
- Ministry of Law and Justice:
Conclusion
While the Constitution of India can be amended, it is not possible to infringe upon fundamental rights through these amendments. The basic structure doctrine, judicial review, and other limitations serve as safeguards to protect the core values and democratic principles enshrined in the Constitution. The Supreme Court's role in interpreting and upholding these limitations is crucial in ensuring that the Constitution remains a living document that protects the rights and liberties of its citizens.