Criticism Of Basic Structure
To prepare for Indian Polity for any competitive exam, aspirants have to know about the basics of the Basic Structure of the Constitution. It gives an idea of all the topics important for the IAS Exam and the polity syllabus (GS-II). Basic Structure of the Constitution and related topics are extremely important for the UPSC Exam. This is an essential portion of the polity. As IAS aspirants, you should be thorough with the Basic Structure of the Constitution. This article will provide you with relevant details about the Criticism Of Basic Structure.
|CRITICISM OF BASIC STRUCTURE|
- No constitutional basis and amounts to rewriting of constitution.
- The doctrine does not have a textual basis. There is no provision stipulating that this Constitution has a basic structure and that this structure is beyond the competence of amending power.
- It is an illegitimate infringement of judiciary on principal of majority rule.
- The attempt by a constitutional court to review the substance of the constitutional amendments would be dangerous for a democratic system in which the amending power belongs to the people or its representatives, not to judges.
- What constitutes basic structure is matter of subjectivity.
- Each judge defines the basic structure concept according to his own subjective satisfaction. This leads to the fact that the validity of invalidity of the Constitution Amendment lies on the personal preference of each judge and the judges will acquire the power to amend the Constitution
- Translates judiciary into third decisive chamber of parliament.
- Amending the Constitution is the duty of the two houses of the Parliament. But by invoking the basic strcuture doctrine the Judiciary acts as the third house and thereby renders the work done by the Parliament meaningless.
- Amending the Constitution even to change the original intention of the Constitution framers,
- An amendment to a Constitution in present times may be necessary even to change the original intention of the Constitution framers, which may not augur well for the subsequent generation which is to work with the Constitution. Therefore to hold that an amendment not falling in the line with the original intention of the founding fathers is not valid.