[Synopsis] Day 19 – July 21, 2024 – 75 Days Mains Revision Plan 2024 – Polity
Kartavya Desk Staff
75 Days Mains Revision Plan 2024 – Polity
Polity
Q1. Compare and contrast the Indian Constitution and the United States Constitution with respect to fundamental rights, federalism, and separation of powers. (150 words, 10M)
Key Demand of the question: To compare and contrast the Indian and United States Constitutions with a focus on fundamental rights, federalism, and separation of powers. Directive: Compare and contrast – Highlight both similarities and differences between the two constitutions on the specified aspects. Structure of the Answer: Introduction: Briefly introduce the Indian Constitution and the United States Constitution, noting their significance and foundational principles. Body: First part: Fundamental Rights Indian Constitution: Discuss rights in Part III, suspension during emergency. U.S. Constitution: Discuss Bill of Rights, inviolability. Second Part: Federalism Indian Constitution: Explain the quasi-federal structure, strong central government, and Seventh Schedule. U.S. Constitution: Explain the federal structure and state autonomy. Third Part: Separation of Powers Indian Constitution: Describe parliamentary system, overlap, checks and balances. U.S. Constitution: Describe strict separation and presidential system. Conclusion: Emphasise reflection of historical and cultural contexts on Indian as well as US constitution.
Key Demand of the question:
To compare and contrast the Indian and United States Constitutions with a focus on fundamental rights, federalism, and separation of powers.
Directive:
Compare and contrast – Highlight both similarities and differences between the two constitutions on the specified aspects.
Structure of the Answer:
Introduction:
Briefly introduce the Indian Constitution and the United States Constitution, noting their significance and foundational principles.
Body:
First part: Fundamental Rights
Indian Constitution: Discuss rights in Part III, suspension during emergency.
U.S. Constitution: Discuss Bill of Rights, inviolability.
Second Part: Federalism
Indian Constitution: Explain the quasi-federal structure, strong central government, and Seventh Schedule.
U.S. Constitution: Explain the federal structure and state autonomy.
Third Part: Separation of Powers
Indian Constitution: Describe parliamentary system, overlap, checks and balances.
U.S. Constitution: Describe strict separation and presidential system.
Conclusion:
Emphasise reflection of historical and cultural contexts on Indian as well as US constitution.
Introduction:
The Indian Constitution and the United States Constitution, despite being products of different historical contexts and political philosophies, share common foundational principles that emphasise democratic governance, individual liberties, and the rule of law. Both constitutions are designed to safeguard fundamental rights and establish a federal structure that balances the power between central and regional governments.
Body:
Comparison of the Indian and United States Constitutions:
Parameters | Indian Constitution | American constitution
Fundamental rights | Enshrined in Part III, the Fundamental Rights include rights such as right to equality, freedom, against exploitation, and cultural and educational rights. Rights are justiciable and citizens can approach the Supreme Court directly under Article 32. | The first ten amendments are Bill of rights which provide protections such as freedom of speech, religion, and due process. Rights are protected by judicial review, established by landmark cases like Marbury v. Madison.
Federalism | Described as “quasi-federal” with a strong central government. States have significant powers, but the centre can override in certain circumstances The Seventh Schedule divides powers into Union, State, and Concurrent Lists. | A clear division between federal and state powers, with states retaining significant sovereignty. Powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states.
Separation of powers | Although separation exists, there is overlap with the judiciary playing a key role in checks and balances through judicial review Executive is drawn from the legislature, creating an overlap between legislative and executive branches. | Clear distinction among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to prevent concentration of power. Each branch has distinct powers with mechanisms to check and balance the others, such as presidential veto and Congressional oversight.
Rights are justiciable and citizens can approach the Supreme Court directly under Article 32.
Rights are protected by judicial review, established by landmark cases like Marbury v. Madison.
The Seventh Schedule divides powers into Union, State, and Concurrent Lists.
Powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states.
Executive is drawn from the legislature, creating an overlap between legislative and executive branches.
Each branch has distinct powers with mechanisms to check and balance the others, such as presidential veto and Congressional oversight.
Conclusion:
Hence, while both constitutions enshrine fundamental rights and adopt federal structures, the Indian Constitution integrates unitary features in federalism and an intertwined system of separation of powers, contrasting with the more strictly separated powers and balanced federalism of the U.S. Constitution.
Q2. While the basic structure doctrine has played a significant role in preventing amendments that violate fundamental principles, there are concerns about potential Judicial Overreach. Discuss. (250 words, 15M)
Key Demand of the question: To discuss the significance of the basic structure doctrine in protecting fundamental principles of the Indian Constitution and to analyse concerns regarding judicial overreach. Directive: Discuss – This requires a detailed examination of both aspects of the topic: the importance of the basic structure doctrine and the concerns about judicial overreach. Structure of the answer: Introduction: Briefly introduce the basic structure doctrine established by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). Mention its purpose in safeguarding the Constitution’s core principles. Body: First part: Significance of the Basic Structure Doctrine Explain how the doctrine prevents arbitrary amendments that could alter the Constitution’s fundamental principles. Provide examples of landmark cases (e.g., Indira Nehru Gandhi vs. Raj Narain, Minerva Mills case) where the doctrine protected constitutional integrity. Second Part: Concerns about Judicial Overreach Criticism of basic structure for vagueness which gives the Judiciary vast powers to expand its ambit. Mention how judicial overreach can impact the balance of power between the judiciary, legislature, and executive. Third part: Provide Suggestions Conclusion: Summarise the dual role of the basic structure doctrine in maintaining constitutional principles and the need to prevent judicial overreach.
Key Demand of the question:
To discuss the significance of the basic structure doctrine in protecting fundamental principles of the Indian Constitution and to analyse concerns regarding judicial overreach.
Directive:
Discuss – This requires a detailed examination of both aspects of the topic: the importance of the basic structure doctrine and the concerns about judicial overreach.
Structure of the answer:
Introduction:
Briefly introduce the basic structure doctrine established by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). Mention its purpose in safeguarding the Constitution’s core principles.
Body:
First part: Significance of the Basic Structure Doctrine
Explain how the doctrine prevents arbitrary amendments that could alter the Constitution’s fundamental principles.
Provide examples of landmark cases (e.g., Indira Nehru Gandhi vs. Raj Narain, Minerva Mills case) where the doctrine protected constitutional integrity.
Second Part: Concerns about Judicial Overreach
Criticism of basic structure for vagueness which gives the Judiciary vast powers to expand its ambit.
Mention how judicial overreach can impact the balance of power between the judiciary, legislature, and executive.
Third part: Provide Suggestions
Conclusion:
Summarise the dual role of the basic structure doctrine in maintaining constitutional principles and the need to prevent judicial overreach.
Introduction:
The basic structure doctrine, established by the Supreme Court of India in the landmark case of Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), plays a crucial role in safeguarding the fundamental principles of the Indian Constitution.
The Basic Structure doctrine asserts that certain basic features of the Constitution cannot be altered by amendments, thereby protecting the core values of democracy, rule of law, and separation of powers.
Role of Basic Structure Doctrine:
• Protection of Fundamental Principles: The basic structure doctrine prevents the Parliament from altering the essential features of the Constitution, such as secularism, federalism, and judicial independence.
• R. Bommai v. Union of India: The Supreme Court of India explicitly declared secularism to be a part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. The Court highlighted that secularism is a fundamental aspect of the Indian Constitution, deeply embedded in its philosophy and functioning.
• Maintaining the integrity of democracy: It ensures that any constitutional amendment does not undermine the core values enshrined in the Constitution, thereby maintaining the integrity of democratic governance.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): The Supreme Court applied the basic structure doctrine to invalidate the 39th Amendment, which sought to place the election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial scrutiny.
• Judicial Safeguard Against Authoritarianism: By limiting the power of the Parliament to amend the Constitution, the judiciary acts as a guardian against potential authoritarian rule.
• Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980): The Court struck down sections of the 42nd Amendment, emphasising that the amendment violated the basic structure by curtailing judicial review.
• Fostering free and Fair elections: Basic structure doctrine helps to realise the sanctity of election process, making sure that each vote counts.
• Kihoto Hollohan Case (1993): Popularly known as the Defection case, the Supreme Court added Free and fair elections, Sovereign, Democratic and Republican structure to the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
Concerns of Judicial Overreach:
P.P. Rao in his book Reclaiming the Vision writes that “the vague concept from the majority judgment of Keshavananda Bharati has made judiciary as the most powerful wing of ‘State’ as compared to legislature and executive.”
• Encroachment on Legislative Domain: Critics argue that the judiciary, through the basic structure doctrine, sometimes oversteps its boundaries by invalidating laws passed by the Parliament.
• This encroachment is seen as undermining the principle of separation of powers, where each branch of government should operate within its defined limits.
• Lack of Clear Definition: The basic structure doctrine lacks a precise definition of what constitutes the ‘basic structure,’ leading to subjective judicial interpretation.
• The striking down of the NJAC Act was perceived by some as judicial overreach, where the judiciary asserted its primacy in appointments, potentially encroaching upon the executive’s domain.
• Translates judiciary into the third decisive chamber of parliament: By invoking the Basic Structure doctrine, the Judiciary acts as the third house and thereby renders the work done by the Parliament meaningless.
Suggestion: The judiciary while expanding its scope of the doctrine instead of overreaching should function effectively to protect the rights of individuals on the behalf of Constitution. However, in the absence of any yardsticks to the doctrine it is also recommended that some kind of fencing should be built as guiding principles to Parliament and prevent the laws from being stuck down on the ground of unconstitutionality.
Conclusion:
As Justice Krishna Iyer remarked, “The judicial verdict must be so structured that it strikes a balance between protecting the Constitution and respecting the sovereignty of the Parliament.” This delicate balance is crucial to ensuring that the judiciary does not overstep its boundaries while safeguarding the core values of the Constitution.
Please subscribe to Our podcast channel HERE
Official Facebook Page HERE
Follow our Twitter Account HERE
Follow our Instagram Account HERE