The Doctrine of Basic Structure

 Introduction

The Doctrine of Basic Structure is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution of India. Rather, it is a judicial innovation that was established by the Supreme Court in the landmark case Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). This doctrine emerged in response to concerns over amendments that were perceived to undermine the foundational principles of the Constitution. It is a judicial safeguard designed to preserve the core structure of the Constitution and ensure a balance of power among the three branches of governance: the legislative, executive, and judiciary.

What is the Doctrine of Basic Structure?

The Doctrine of Basic Structure asserts that if the Parliament passes any law that destroys or alters the fundamental structure of the Constitution, that law will be deemed invalid to the extent that it violates this basic structure. The primary objective behind this doctrine is to maintain the authority of the Supreme Court as the highest judicial body while ensuring a fair distribution of power among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government.

Evolution of the Basic Structure Doctrine

1. Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951):
   

   In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Parliament's power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 also extends to amending Fundamental Rights. The Court ruled that the word "law" in Article 13 applies only to ordinary laws, not constitutional amendments.

2. IC Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967):
   The Court overruled its earlier judgment and declared that Fundamental Rights hold a transcendental and immutable position in the Constitution. As such, Parliament could not amend or abridge these rights. The Court also held that constitutional amendments are subject to Article 13 and can be challenged on the grounds of violating Fundamental Rights.

   In response, the Parliament passed the 24th Amendment Act (1971), explicitly declaring its power to amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights.

3. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973):
   This case marked the birth of the Basic Structure Doctrine. The Supreme Court, in a narrow 7-6 majority, ruled that Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution but cannot alter its basic structure. This decision became the cornerstone of the doctrine.

4. 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act (1976):
   This amendment sought to limit judicial review and declared that no amendment to the Constitution could be challenged in court. However, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the Basic Structure Doctrine, emphasizing that Parliament's amending power is not absolute and cannot alter the Constitution’s basic structure.

5. Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980):
   The Supreme Court identified several basic features of the Constitution, including:

   • Limited power of Parliament to amend the Constitution
   • Harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy
   • Judicial review in certain cases

Affirmation of the Doctrine in Subsequent Cases

The Basic Structure Doctrine has been consistently affirmed and refined through numerous cases, including Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) and Waman Rao v. Union of India (1980).

Components of the Basic Structure

The Basic Structure Doctrine identifies several core components of the Indian Constitution that cannot be altered through amendments. These include:

1. Supremacy of the Constitution:
   The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any amendment that undermines its supremacy violates the basic structure. The Kesavananda Bharati case emphasized this point.

2. Republican and Democratic Form of Government:
   The Constitution establishes a government based on the will of the people, which cannot be altered. This concept was explored in the Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain case.

3. Secularism:
   Secularism is a fundamental feature, ensuring that the state remains neutral in religious matters. Any attempt to undermine this principle is unconstitutional. This was reinforced in the S R Bommai v. Union of India (1994) case.

4. Federal Structure:
   The balance of power between the central government and state governments is an essential feature of the Constitution. Any amendment that disrupts this balance is considered an infringement on the basic structure.

5. Separation of Powers:
   The doctrine includes the clear division of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Any amendment that disrupts this separation and concentrates power in one branch is a violation of the basic structure.

6. Judicial Review:
   Judicial review is intrinsic to the Indian Constitution, enabling the judiciary to oversee the actions of the executive and legislature to ensure they conform to constitutional principles.

7. Independent Judiciary:
   An independent judiciary acts as a check on the powers of the other branches of government. In the SC Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015) case, the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act (2014) to protect the independence of the judiciary.

Conclusion

The Basic Structure Doctrine strikes a delicate balance between allowing flexibility in constitutional amendments and preserving the Constitution's core principles. While the doctrine's existence is widely accepted, there is ongoing debate over its specific components. The judiciary continues to define and reaffirm the key features that make up the basic structure, ensuring that the Constitution remains dynamic while protecting its essential values.