DOCSLIB.ORG

Comprehending and Inquisitioning the 'Doctrine of Basic Structure'

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comprehending and Inquisitioning the 'Doctrine of Basic Structure' International Journal of Research and Review Vol.7; Issue: 3; March 2020 Website: www.ijrrjournal.com Review Article E-ISSN: 2349-9788; P-ISSN: 2454-2237 Comprehending and Inquisitioning the ‘Doctrine of Basic Structure’ in India: Urgency to Define the Doctrine Satarupa Datta 5th Year Student, B.A.LL.B (Hons.), Law College Dehradun, Uttaranchal University. ABSTRACT Constitution itself. Further, distinction in the form of three separate branches of the The doctrine of ‘basic structure’ has often Government i.e. Legislature, Executive and been labelled as a form of judicial Judiciary exist. In fact, powers and overreach or judicial activism. In fact, the functions have also been defined, yet the task of law-making which belongs to the present times have seen the urgency of the legislature has been overtaken by the Judiciary to intervene, as the Guardian of judiciary, in the way of a duty imposed Fundamental Rights to such an extent that it upon itself as both the interpreter as well as has stepped into the task of the law-making. the Guardian of the fundamental rights. One such example is that of the ‘Doctrine of Therefore, vesting upon itself the power to Basic Structure’. define the ‘basic features’ of the Initially, it was introduced to protect Constitution i.e. the work of lawmaking. the interest of the Constitution itself, the This article will argue why the task of Judiciary acted on the power conferred on it defining the ‘basic features’ of the by the same. The doctrine came into light Constitution should not be left open to the when distinguished German jurist, Professor Apex Court. Additionally the Dietrich Conrad while delivering a lecture implementation of this doctrine after the on ‘Implied Limitations of the Amending case of Keshvananda, [1] in matters of Power’ [3] posed the question: constitutional amendments. The article will Could a constitutional amendment begin with a brief introduction of the abolish Article 21, to the effect that doctrine. Part II will discuss judicial forthwith a person could be deprived of his overreach with reference to the doctrine's life or personal liberty without authorization application. While part III of the article will by law? Could the ruling party, if it sees its conclude with some observations and a majority shrinking, amend Article 368 to the conclusion. effect that the amending power rests with the President acting on the advice of the Key words: doctrine of ‘basic structure’, Prime Minister? Could the amending power judicial overreach, judicial activism be used to abolish the Constitution? His thought was inspired by the I- INTRODUCTION Weimar Constitution’s, Eternity Clause [4] The Constitution of India is the which was incorporated in the Basic Law of grundnorm, [2] which lays down provisions the Federal Republic of Germany [5] to necessary for the functioning of the State establish that certain fundamental principles (India). Where to facilitate proper of Germany’s democracy can never be functioning, concepts like Separation of removed, not even by Parliament. [6] Unlike Power etc. have a special place in the Germany, the Doctrine has not yet been International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 80 Vol.7; Issue: 3; March 2020 Satarupa Datta. Comprehending and inquisitioning the ‘doctrine of basic structure’ in India: urgency to define the doctrine enshrined inside the text of the Constitution balance won’t simply be enough for the of India. [7] Even though the doctrine is purpose. Though established, the Basic highly regarded around the world to be the features still need protection and therefore contribution of the Indian Supreme Court require to be kept away separately without but in reality, it is its application to the the intervention of any. famous Kesavananda Bharati case [8] which has earned it the title of judge-made law. II THE TUSSLE: LEGISLATURE OR Hence, from Golaknath [9] to NJAC case [10] JUDICIAL ACTIVISM the Indian Chapter of the ‘basic structure (Judicial activism with reference to the doctrine’ has added to its basic features, application of the doctrine) concepts like Judicial Review, [11] balance Judicial Review for the very first between Fundamental Rights [12] and time was introduced by the US Supreme Directive Principles, [13] Free and fair Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison. elections, [14] Rule of Law, [15] Federal [24] And from there the concept got structure, unity and integrity of India, popularity, leading to more and more Secularism, Socialism, Social justice, [16] countries adopting it into their system. Independence of Judiciary, [17] etc. There is per se no problem with the concept Finally, in the recent chain of events, of ‘Judicial Activism’ or ‘Judicial the doctrine evolved further and continued Legislation’, as article 367 of the its journey in the form of two landmark Constitution itself provides power to the judgments i.e. ‘right to privacy’ [18] and the Judiciary to interpret the constitution as a Constitutional validity of Part XIV of the legal instrument [25] declare the same and Finance Act, 2017 [19] make it binding upon all authorities in India. Now focusing back on the title of the But the same has to be done in consonance lecture [20] a very important concept had and conformity with the constitutional been propounded ‘Implied Limitation’. Its dictates and confined to the extent permitted relation with that of the Basic Structure which distinguishes it from ‘Judicial Doctrine is what establishes the argument in overreach’. [26] favor of giving express place to the basic In India, the concept of ‘Judicial features inside the text of the Constitution. Review’ has been classified into three Implied limitation was discussed by aspects: (1) judicial review of legislative the Supreme Court in the case of Shankari action, (2) judicial review of judicial Prasad v. Union of India. [21] Though at that decisions and (3) judicial review of time the Hon’ble Court denied any administrative action. [27] Where article 245 limitation subject to article 368 on the of the Constitution empowers the power of Parliament but in the case of Parliament to make laws subject to certain Golaknath [22] a different stand was taken restrictions and thus the power to ‘Judicial and the 24th Constitutional amendment Act Review’ can be exercised under article 32 & [23] was passed by the Parliament. Thus article 226 of the Constitution. In other giving rise to the continued struggle of words, the power to review any legislative defining the ‘basic feature’. Additionally, action including constitutional amendments the core concept of article 368 & 13 of the by the Supreme Court has to be done by Constitution can be narrowed down to way of interpretation. [28] Thus, the labeling amendments into constitutional and Constitutional Courts though conferred with unconstitutional, it becomes even more the power to deal with extraordinary important to identify the act done, whether situations for the larger interest of justice amounts to ‘ordinary legislation’ or and prevention of injustice must use it ‘Constitutional amendment’. The challenges sparingly. [29] thus posed in front of the parliament are in a In the words of Justice J S Verma (former way manifold. But the concept of check and Chief Justice of India): International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 81 Vol.7; Issue: 3; March 2020 Satarupa Datta. Comprehending and inquisitioning the ‘doctrine of basic structure’ in India: urgency to define the doctrine …the judiciary should only compel guarantee against sexual harassment and performance of duty by the designated abuse, more particularly against sexual authority in case of its inaction or failure, harassment at work places, we lay down the while a takeover by the judiciary of the guidelines and norms specified hereinafter function allocated to another branch is for due observance at all workplaces or inappropriate. Judicial activism is other institutions, until a legislation is appropriate when it is in the domain of enacted for the purpose. This is done in legitimate judicial review. It should neither exercise of the power available under be judicial ‘adhocism’ nor judicial tyranny. Article 32 of the Constitution for The acknowledgment of this enforcement of the fundamental rights and it difference between “judicial activism” and is further emphasized that this would be “judicial overreach” is vital for the smooth treated as the law declared by this Court functioning of a constitutional democracy under Article 141 of the Constitution. with the separation of powers as its central This is clear from the quoted characteristic and supremacy of the judgment that the Hon’ble Court constitution as the foundation of its edifice. acknowledges the fact that the primary task [30] of lawmaking belongs to the legislature. But Therefore the intention is clear, constructing guidelines to be implemented balance is required, and the answer to instead of directing the appropriate authority ‘Judicial overreach’ has to be judicial to do so falls under ‘Judicial Legislation’. restraint. Although the act of judicial In the matter of Kasturilal v. State of activism is not bad in itself but the Uttar Pradesh, [34] Chief Justice overreach or overstepping and placing Gajendragadkar found the law relating to oneself into the sphere of other, that too government liability ‘not very satisfactory’, without being the proper authority does call but did not make the change by judicial for a review of action on part of the construction instead he suggested legislative Judiciary. Being the Guardian of the intervention to rectify the position of law. Constitution, the expectation remains at Thereby, acknowledging the competence of large as no other organ of the State but the the legislature. Thus, Judges, for instance, Hon’ble court has to put the necessary do use the tool of interpretation and along restriction or restraint upon itself. with this their personal thought process, Interpreter or Lawmaker ideas, experiences, etc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Case of the Indian Supreme Court - and a Plea for Research
    The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process Volume 9 Issue 2 Article 3 2007 Scholarly Discourse and the Cementing of Norms: The Case of the Indian Supreme Court - and a Plea for Research Jayanth K. Krishnan Follow this and additional works at: https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/appellatepracticeprocess Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation Jayanth K. Krishnan, Scholarly Discourse and the Cementing of Norms: The Case of the Indian Supreme Court - and a Plea for Research, 9 J. APP. PRAC. & PROCESS 255 (2007). Available at: https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/appellatepracticeprocess/vol9/iss2/3 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Bowen Law Repository: Scholarship & Archives. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process by an authorized administrator of Bowen Law Repository: Scholarship & Archives. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SCHOLARLY DISCOURSE AND THE CEMENTING OF NORMS: THE CASE OF THE INDIAN SUPREME COURT -AND A PLEA FOR RESEARCH Jayanth K. Krishnan* I. INTRODUCTION For Americans, India has been a country of intense interest in recent years. Less than ten years ago India alarmed many around the world, including then-President Clinton, after it (and neighboring Pakistan) conducted a series of nuclear tests.' But even before this military display, India was on the radar of observers in the United States. Since opening its markets in 1991, India has been fertile ground for American entrepreneurs2 engaged in outsourcing and for other foreign investors as well. With the exception of a two-year period between 1975 and 1977, India has served as a light of democratic rule in the developing world since it gained independence from Britain in 1947.
    [Show full text]
  • State Constitutions and the Basic Structure Doctrine Manoj Mate, Whittier Law School
    Whittier College From the SelectedWorks of Manoj S. Mate 2014 State Constitutions and the Basic Structure Doctrine Manoj Mate, Whittier Law School Available at: https://works.bepress.com/manojmate/4/ COLUMBIA HUMAN RIGHTS LAW REVIEW STATE CONSTITUTIONS AND THE BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE Manoj Mate, Ph.D., J.D. Reprinted from Columbia Human Rights Law Review Vol. 45, No. 2 Winter 2014 COLUMBIA HUMAN RIGHTS LAW REVIEW Vol. 45, No. 2 Winter 2014 EDITORIAL BOARD 2013–2014 Editor-in-Chief Ashley Starr Kinseth Executive Editor JLM Editor-in-Chief Edward Kim Alejandro Ortega Journal Executive Executive JLM Executive Submissions Editor Production and Managing Editor Nathiya Nagendra Managing Director Katherine Park Alexander Zbrozek Journal Executive JLM Executive Articles Notes Editor Director of Staff and Editor Zahreen Ghaznavi Alumni Development Michelle Luo Dinah Manning Journal Notes and JLM Executive State Submissions Editors Supplements Editor Brian Civale Aretha Chakraborti Max Hirsch Caroline Stover Executive SJLM Editor Eduardo Gonzalez Journal Articles Editors JLM Articles Editors Beatrice Franklin Rachel Burkhart Mickey Hubbard Meagan Burrows Tamara Livshiz David Hirsch Ian MacDougall Mark Singer Sara Nies Alyssa White Sarah Saadoun Heejeong Won Journal Managing JLM Managing Editors Editors JoAnn Kintz Diane Chan Jarrell Mitchell Johanna Hudgens Corinna Provey Benjamin Menker Dina Wegh COLUMBIA HUMAN RIGHTS LAW REVIEW Vol. 45, No. 2 Winter 2014 STAFF EDITORS Mitra Anoushiravani Joseph Guzman Patrick Ryan Nieri Avanessian Whitney Hayes
    [Show full text]
  • The Mechanism for Revising the Constitution of Georgia and the Constitutional Reform of 2017
    Givi Luashvili PhD Candidate at Law Faculty of Tbilisi State University THE MECHANISM FOR REVISING THE CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM OF 2017 ABSTRACT The purpose of the discussion in the present paper was to assess the dependence of the re- form of the Constitution of Georgia regarding the Constitution Revision mechanism. The study revealed the main positive and negative trends that characterize the new mechanism for revising the basic act. Within the scope of the research, the new method of revising the constitution was evaluated in the retrospective context, which led to the conclusion that the mechanism of revision of the constitution becomes more robust. The research assessed positive and negative sides of the Scandinavian model selected for the revision of the constitution and the conclusion indi- cated that the Scandinavian, quasi-referendum model may have a lot of negative characteris- tics, but as an expression of direct democracy and an important mechanism of stability was recognized as a positive step in the final assessment. Also, critical assessment was made on the revision and accelerated mechanism of adoption of the Constitution, which in fact op- posed the existence of a Scandinavian model. The paper discusses the attitude of the constitution revision mechanism to the constitutional control and the perspective of existence of entrenched clauses, which resulted in specific recommendations and tools for their implementation in the Constitution of Georgia. The paper also expresses the views on the better formation of several procedural issues in revis- ing the constitution. Finally, the constitutional reform of the 2017 regarding the constitutional revision should be assessed as a step forward, but it must be noted that there are important shortcomings in the existing mechanism and it is impossible to say that the mechanism of revision of the Consti- tution of Georgia is perfect and flawless.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Shariʿa the Politics of Islamic Judicial Review by Shoaib
    Defining Shariʿa The Politics of Islamic Judicial Review By Shoaib A. Ghias A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Jurisprudence and Social Policy in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Malcolm M. Feeley, Chair Professor Martin M. Shapiro Professor Asad Q. Ahmed Summer 2015 Defining Shariʿa The Politics of Islamic Judicial Review © 2015 By Shoaib A. Ghias Abstract Defining Shariʿa: The Politics of Islamic Judicial Review by Shoaib A. Ghias Doctor of Philosophy in Jurisprudence and Social Policy University of California, Berkeley Professor Malcolm M. Feeley, Chair Since the Islamic resurgence of the 1970s, many Muslim postcolonial countries have established and empowered constitutional courts to declare laws conflicting with shariʿa as unconstitutional. The central question explored in this dissertation is whether and to what extent constitutional doctrine developed in shariʿa review is contingent on the ruling regime or represents lasting trends in interpretations of shariʿa. Using the case of Pakistan, this dissertation contends that the long-term discursive trends in shariʿa are determined in the religio-political space and only reflected in state law through the interaction of shariʿa politics, regime politics, and judicial politics. The research is based on materials gathered during fieldwork in Pakistan and datasets of Federal Shariat Court and Supreme Court cases and judges. In particular, the dissertation offers a political-institutional framework to study shariʿa review in a British postcolonial court system through exploring the role of professional and scholar judges, the discretion of the chief justice, the system of judicial appointments and tenure, and the political structure of appeal that combine to make courts agents of the political regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation of Venice Commission Opinions and Reports Concerning Courts and Judges, CDL-PI(2019)008
    Strasbourg, 8 October 2020 CDL-PI(2020)012 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) COMPILATION OF VENICE COMMISSION OPINIONS AND REPORTS CONCERNING SEPARATION OF POWERS(*) (*) This document will be updated regularly. This version contains all opinions and reports/studies adopted up to and including the Venice Commission’s 124th Plenary Session (8-9 October 2020). This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-PI(2020)012 - 2 - Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 II. Definition and main features of the principle of separation of powers ............................ 4 A. Definition - the possible political systems ................................................................... 4 B. Main features - checks and balances ......................................................................... 5 C. The re-election of the President ................................................................................. 8 III. Relationship between the Legislature and the Executive ............................................... 9 A. In general .................................................................................................................. 9 B. Legislative powers of the executive ......................................................................... 10 1. In general .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE Raju Ramachandran* 1
    SUDHIR KRISHNASWAMY: DEMOCRACY AND CONSTITUTIONALISM IN INDIA - A STUDY OF THE BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE Raju Ramachandran* 1. Introduction Sudhir Krishnaswamy's Democracy and Constitutionalism in India - A study of the Basic Structure Doctrine! is a major contribution to the discourse on the Basic Structure Doctrine. He is not a mere defender, but an active proponent ofthe doctrine. He goes far beyond the semantics of"amendment", to make out his case. For the reader to immediately know what the author wants to say, it is best to quote from his own concise preface: "This work makes two arguments: first, that basic structure review is an independent and distinct type of constitutional judicial review which applies .to all forms of state action to ensure that such action does not 'damage or destroy' , basic features' of the Constitution. These basic features of the Constitution are identified through a common law· technique and are general constitutional rules, which are supported by several provisions of the Constitution. Second, I argue that the basic structure doctrine like other types. of constitutional judiCial review possesses a sound constitutional and rests on a sound and justifiable interpretation of the Constitution. The basic structure doctrine is founded on an interpretation of the Constitution granting amending, executive and legislative power that relies on multi-provisional implications drawn from other important.provisions of the Constitution".2 At the outset, the reviewer must state, for the benefit of those who do not already know, that he has a stated position on the Basic Structure Doctrine. The book under review does him the honour of referenCing his essay and dealing with his arguments.
    [Show full text]
  • India and the Rise of the Good Governance Court
    Washington University Global Studies Law Review Volume 8 Issue 1 January 2009 Expanding Judiciaries: India and the Rise of the Good Governance Court Nick Robinson Yale Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, and the Judges Commons Recommended Citation Nick Robinson, Expanding Judiciaries: India and the Rise of the Good Governance Court, 8 WASH. U. GLOBAL STUD. L. REV. 1 (2009), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol8/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Global Studies Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Global Studies Law Review VOLUME 8 NUMBER 1 2009 EXPANDING JUDICIARIES: INDIA AND THE RISE OF THE GOOD GOVERNANCE COURT NICK ROBINSON∗ ABSTRACT In recent years, courts have risen in power across the world, and the Indian Supreme Court has rightly been pointed to as an example of this global trend. In many ways the Indian Court has become a court of good governance that sits in judgment over the rest of the Indian government. This Article argues that the Court has expanded its mandate as a result of the shortcomings (real, perceived, or feared) of India’s representative institutions. The Indian Supreme Court’s institutional structure has also aided its rise and helps explain why the Court has gained more influence than most other judiciaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Handcuffs Richard Albert Boston College Law School, [email protected]
    Boston College Law School Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School Boston College Law School Faculty Papers January 2010 Constitutional Handcuffs Richard Albert Boston College Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/lsfp Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Richard Albert. "Constitutional Handcuffs." Arizona State Law Journal 42, (2010): 663-. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Law School Faculty Papers by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONSTITUTIONAL HANDCUFFS Richard Albert † TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................664 II. CONSTITUTIONAL ENTRENCHMENT .......................................................668 A. Degrees of Permanence .................................................................670 B. Entrenching Permanence ...............................................................672 III. POPULAR RETRENCHMENT ....................................................................678 A. Preservative Entrenchment ............................................................678 B. Transformational Entrenchment ....................................................685 C. Reconciliatory Entrenchment .........................................................693 IV.
    [Show full text]
  • The Meaning of Law, 49 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1077 (2016)
    UIC Law Review Volume 49 Issue 4 Article 4 Summer 2016 The Meaning of Law, 49 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1077 (2016) Anuj Puri Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Anuj Puri, The Meaning of Law, 49 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1077 (2016) https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol49/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE MEANING OF LAW1 ANUJ PURI I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................... 1078 II. THE MEANING OF “MEANING” ............................................. 1079 III. FROM MEANING TO DEFINITION .......................................... 1081 A. Infusion of Meaning: The Myth of Sisyphus ................ 1086 IV. THE BATTLE BETWEEN SINGULARITY AND PLURALITY.......... 1088 A. Exhibit A: The Doctrine of Basic Structure ................. 1090 B. Exhibit B: M/s. DRG Grate Udyog v. State of Madhya Pradesh ...................................................................... 1094 C. Exhibit C: The “Right to Education” Case ................... 1096 D. Meaning and Identity ................................................. 1098 V. CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 1100 “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.” ~Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass2 Abstract Human beings intrinsically seek meaning. We readily accept and absorb a proposition or even a legal stipulation, if it is meaningful.
    [Show full text]
  • SIERRA LEONE to the UNITED NATIONS 245 East 49Th Street • New York, NY 10017
    PERMANENT MISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE TO THE UNITED NATIONS 245 East 49th Street • New York, NY 10017 STATEMENT by His Excellency Mr. Amado Koroma Deputy Permanent Representative at the Meeting of the Sixth Committee 69th United Nations General Assembly New York, 10th October, 2014 Check Against Delivery Mr. Chairman, I wish first of all to associate with the statements delivered by the distinguished representatives of Iran on behalf of the Non Aligned Movement (NAM) as well as that of South Africa delivered on behalf of the African Union Group. I now wish to make a statement on behalf of my country. My delegation is very excited to participate in the debate of this very important agenda item of the 6th Committee on the topic: "The Applicability of the Rule of Law at the National and International level". Today, the strict adherence to the global concept of the Rule of Law is one of the barometers that is used to determine whether a state is socially, economically and politically progressive. It is a concept of international good practice. The Rule of Law envisages a situation where the law and not the individual is supreme. In the Report of the Secretary-General under the rubric: "Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post- conflict Societies" S/2004/616, the Rule of Law is defined as "a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the state itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards.
    [Show full text]
  • IR Coelho (Dead) by L.Rs. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Others
    “I.R. Coelho (dead) by L.Rs. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Others” The Nine Judges' decision by Supreme Court (The 9th Schedule Case) 'A Case Study' Lecture delivered at the 'Advocates Association' on 9th Feb., 2007 at 4.15 pm: Organised by 'SAMVAAD' **** By Justice Sunil Ambwani, Judge Allahabad High Court, Allahabad 1. The nine judges' Bench presided by Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, CJI delivered a unanimous verdict on 11.1.2007 in I.R. Coelho (dead) by L.Rs. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others, upholding the 'Basic Structure Doctrine', and the authority of the judiciary to review any such laws, which destroy or damage the basic structure as indicated in Art.21 read with Art.14, Art.19 and the principles underlying thereunder, even if they have been put in 9th Schedule after 14th April, 1973 (the date of the judgment in Kesavananda Bharti's case). The judgment upholds the right of judicial review and the supremacy of judiciary in interpreting the laws, which have been constantly under threat. The judgment reiterates and defines the exclusive right of the judiciary to interpret laws, in an ongoing struggle of supremacy between legislative and judiciary since 26th Nov. 1949, when the Constitution was dedicated to the people of India. Legislative History: Right to Property 2. The philosophy underlying our Constitution goes back to the historic Objective Resolution of Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru adopted by the Constituent Assembly on January 22, 1947, which inspired the shaping of the Constitution through all its subsequent stages: 'The guarantee and security to all the people of India, justice, social, economic and political; equality of status of opportunity, before the law; freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship, vocation, association and action, subject to law and public morality was the objectives for drafting the Constitution.' The preamble embodied these objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • The Malaysian Judiciary and Constitutional Politics
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2016 On the Uneven Journey to Constitutional Redemption: The Malaysian Judiciary and Constitutional Politics Yvonne Tew Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1924 25 Wash. Int'l. L.J. 673 (2016) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the Constitutional Law Commons Compilation © 2016 Washington International Law Journal Association ON THE UNEVEN JOURNEY TO CONSTITUTIONAL REDEMPTION: THE MALAYSIAN JUDICIARY AND CONSTITUTIONAL POLITICS Yvonne Tew† Abstract: This article explores the Malaysian judiciary’s approach toward interpreting the Federal Constitution of Malaysia and situates it within the context of the nation’s political and constitutional history. It traces the judiciary’s tentative movement toward a more rights-oriented approach followed by its more recent retreat in several appellate court decisions. This article argues that the Malaysian courts’ journey toward constitutional redemption has been uneven so far. In order to reclaim its constitutional position as a co-equal branch of government, the Malaysian judiciary must exhibit greater willingness to assert its commitment to constitutional supremacy and the rule of law. I. INTRODUCTION The story of the Malaysian judiciary is inextricably linked to the nation’s constitutional politics. It is a tale of the judicial institution’s rise, fall, and ensuing struggle toward constitutional restoration. Constitutional interpretation is, in large part, an underlying theme to this story: it is the means by which the judiciary articulates how it sees its role and molds its fate within the political climate that it finds itself.
    [Show full text]