The Doctrine of Basic Structure: Landmark Cases and Constitutional Impact

1. Conceptual Definition

The Doctrine of Basic Structure is a judicial innovation that limits the amending power of the Parliament. While Article 368 of the Constitution gives Parliament the power to amend the text, the Supreme Court ruled that this power is not "absolute."

The Constitution has certain intrinsic values (like democracy, secularism, and federalism) that form its foundation. If these are removed, the Constitution loses its identity. Therefore, Parliament can "amend" (repair or improve) the Constitution but cannot "rewrite" or "destroy" it.

2. The Historical "Tug-of-War" (Landmark Cases)

The doctrine emerged from a 20-year conflict between the Judiciary (protecting property rights and fundamental rights) and the Legislature (trying to implement social welfare and land reforms).

A. The Period of Parliamentary Supremacy (1951–1967)

• Shankari Prasad Case (1951) & Sajjan Singh Case (1965): 

  • Issue: Can Parliament amend Fundamental Rights?

  • Ruling: The Court held that the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 includes the power to amend Fundamental Rights. At this stage, Parliament was seen as supreme.

B. The Judicial Shift (1967)

• Golaknath v. State of Punjab: 

  • Ruling: An 11-judge bench ruled that Fundamental Rights are "transcendental" and "sacrosanct."

  • Impact: The Court stated that Parliament has no power to take away or abridge Fundamental Rights. This created a deadlock between the government and the courts.

C. The Birth of the Doctrine (1973)

• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala:

  • The Context: The government passed the 24th and 25th Amendments to bypass the Golaknath ruling.

  • The Bench: A record 13-judge bench heard the case.

  • The Verdict: The Court overruled the Golaknath case. It said Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights, but it introduced a caveat: The "Basic Structure" must remain intact.

  • Significance: This is the most important case in Indian history because it saved the Constitution from being replaced by a completely different system of governance.

D. The Emergency Era & Reinforcement (1975–1980)

• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): The Court applied the doctrine for the first time. It struck down the 39th Amendment (which protected the PM’s election from court challenges), ruling that Judicial Review and Free/Fair Elections are basic features.

• Minerva Mills Case (1980): * The Parliament tried to assert that its amending power was "unlimited" via the 42nd Amendment.

  • Ruling: The Court struck this down, stating: "The donor [the Constitution] has conferred limited power on the donee [Parliament]; the donee cannot, by exercising that power, convert the limited power into an unlimited one."

3. Key Elements of the Basic Structure

Since there is no written list in the Constitution, the Court identifies "basic" features over time. Currently, these include:

4. Importance and Criticism

Why it is Vital:

• Prevents Tyranny: It stops a political party with a "brute majority" from changing India into a non-democratic state.

• Protects Minorities: Ensures that basic rights and secularism cannot be voted away.

• Maintains Continuity: Ensures the Constitution of 1950 remains the same document in spirit today.

The Criticism:

• Judicial Overreach: Critics argue that "Basic Structure" is not mentioned in the Constitution and gives unelected judges too much power over elected representatives.

• Vagueness: Because the list of basic features is not fixed, the government often doesn't know if a law will be struck down until after it is passed.

5. Recent Application (The NJAC Case - 2015)

In the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, the Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. The Court ruled that "Independence of the Judiciary" is a part of the Basic Structure, and the NJAC gave the Executive too much influence over judge appointments.