Hi, getting visibility among core literary public is benchmark
of publishing success and this message is part of an aggressive online campaign
for the promotion and visibility of my two books [1] Political Internet and [2] Intimate Speakers among core reading public in
online space.
It will be really helpful if you are able
to help me forward, share, tweet, post, or tag this message or parts of this
message among potential
beneficiaries of the ideas in the books in your network, your friend’s
network or their networks?
Or anyone should according to you
benefit if they work broadly on anything related to social media, Internet,
society, politics, cyber sexuality, Internet pornography, intimacies,
women and online misogyny, introverts, underprivileged people, Diaspora,
cyberspace, Internet in education, International relations, digital politics,
social media and state, public sphere, civil society, social capital,
contentious politics and so on.
Buy it on Amazon:
Preview on Google Play:
Preview on Google Books:
Preview on Kindle:
Publisher Website:
2. Intimate Speakers: Why Introverted and Socially Ostracized Citizens
Use Social Media, (Fingerprint! 2017).
Buy it on Amazon:
Flipkart:
Blog Review:
goodreadsreviews:
Contact the author
Facebook: https://www.facebook
Twitter: https://twitter.com/b
Blogger: http://bijugayu.blogs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin
WordPress: https://bijugayu.wo
Tumblr: http://bijugayu.tumblr
Google +: https://plus.google.com/102
Twitter: https://twitter.com/b
Blogger: http://bijugayu.blogs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin
WordPress: https://bijugayu.wo
Tumblr: http://bijugayu.tumblr
Google +: https://plus.google.com/102
Biju
P R
Author,
Teacher, Blogger
Assistant
Professor of Political Science
Government
Brennen College
Thalassery
Kerala,
India
My Books
1. Political Internet: State and Politics in the Age of Social Media,
(Routledge 2017), Amazon https://www.amazon.in/
2. Intimate Speakers: Why Introverted and Socially Ostracized Citizens Use Social Media, (Fingerprint! 2017)
Amazon: http://www.amazon.in/dp/
1. Political Internet: State and Politics in the Age of Social Media,
(Routledge 2017), Amazon https://www.amazon.in/
2. Intimate Speakers: Why Introverted and Socially Ostracized Citizens Use Social Media, (Fingerprint! 2017)
Amazon: http://www.amazon.in/dp/
Theory of basic structure: a limitation on
amending power
The question whether fundamental rights can be amended under article 368 came for consideration in the Supreme Court in Shankari Prasad case.[3] in this case validity of constitution (1st amendment) act, 1951 which inserted inter alia , articles 31-A and 31-B of the constitution was challenged. The amendment was challenged on the ground that it abridges the rights conferred by part III and hence was void. The Supreme Court however rejected the above argument and held that power to amend including the fundamental rights is contained in Article 368and the same view was taken by court in Sajjan Singh case.
In Golak Nath case,the validity of 17th
Amendment which inserted certain acts in Ninth Schedule was again challenged.
The Supreme Court ruled the parliament had no power to amend Part III of the
constitution and overruled its earlier decision in Shankari Prasad and Sajjan
Singh case. In order to remove difficulties created by the decision of SC in
Golak Nath case parliament enacted the 24th Amendment act. The Supreme Court
recognized BASIC STRUCTURE concept for the first time in the historic
Kesavananda Bharati[6] case in 1973. Ever since the Supreme Court has been the
interpreter of the Constitution and the arbiter of all amendments made by
parliament. In this case validity of the 25th Amendment act was challenged
along with the Twenty-fourth and Twenty-ninth Amendments. The court by majority
overruled the Golak Nath case which denied parliament the power to amend
fundamental rights of the citizens. The majority held that article 368 even
before the 24th Amendment contained the power as well as the procedure of
amendment. The Supreme Court declared that Article 368 did not enable
Parliament to alter the basic structure or framework of the Constitution and
parliament could not use its amending powers under Article368 to 'damage',
'emasculate', 'destroy', 'abrogate', 'change' or 'alter' the 'basic structure'
or framework of the constitution.
This decision is not just a landmark in the
evolution of constitutional law, but also a turning point in constitutional
history.
Basic Features of
the Constitution according to the Kesavanada verdict each judge laid out
separately, what he thought were the basic or essential features of the
Constitution.
Sikri, C.J. explained that the concept of
basic structure included:
# Supremacy of
the Constitution
#
Republican and democratic form of government
# Secular
character of the Constitution
#
Separation of powers between the legislature, executive and the judiciary
# Federal character of the Constitution
# Federal character of the Constitution
Shelat, J. and
Grover, J. added three more basic features to this list:
# The
mandate to build a welfare state contained in the Directive Principles of State
Policy
# Unity and
integrity of the nation
#
Sovereignty of the country.
Unegde, J. and Mukherjea, J. identified a separate and shorter list of basic features:
# Sovereignty of India
# Democratic character of the polity
# Unity of the country
# Essential features of the individual freedoms secured to the citizens
# Mandate to build a welfare state
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. stated that elements of the basic features were to be found in the Preamble Of the Constitution and the provisions into which they translated such as:
# Sovereign democratic republic
# Justice - social, economic and political
# Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship
# Equality of status and the opportunity.
Basic Structure concept reaffirmed- the Indira Gandhi Election case In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narayan the Supreme Court applied the theory of basic structure and struck down cl. of article 329-A,which was inserted by the 39th Amendment in 1975 on the ground that it was beyond the amending power of the parliament as it destroyed the ? basic feature? of the constitution. The amendment was made to the jurisdiction of all courts including SC, over disputes relating to elections involving the Prime Minister of India.
Unegde, J. and Mukherjea, J. identified a separate and shorter list of basic features:
# Sovereignty of India
# Democratic character of the polity
# Unity of the country
# Essential features of the individual freedoms secured to the citizens
# Mandate to build a welfare state
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. stated that elements of the basic features were to be found in the Preamble Of the Constitution and the provisions into which they translated such as:
# Sovereign democratic republic
# Justice - social, economic and political
# Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship
# Equality of status and the opportunity.
Basic Structure concept reaffirmed- the Indira Gandhi Election case In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narayan the Supreme Court applied the theory of basic structure and struck down cl. of article 329-A,which was inserted by the 39th Amendment in 1975 on the ground that it was beyond the amending power of the parliament as it destroyed the ? basic feature? of the constitution. The amendment was made to the jurisdiction of all courts including SC, over disputes relating to elections involving the Prime Minister of India.
Basic Features of
the Constitution according to the Election case verdict Again, each judge
expressed views about what amounts to the basic structure of the Constitution:
Justice Y.V. Chandrachud listed four basic features which he considered
unamendable:
# Sovereign democratic republic status
# Equality of status and opportunity of an individual
# Secularism and freedom of conscience and religion
# 'government of laws and not of men' i.e. the rule of law
# Sovereign democratic republic status
# Equality of status and opportunity of an individual
# Secularism and freedom of conscience and religion
# 'government of laws and not of men' i.e. the rule of law
Justice H.R.
Khanna- ?democracy is a basic feature of the Constitution and includes free and
fair elections.?
Basic structure doctrine reaffirmed - the
Minerva Mills
In Minerva Mills case[10] the Supreme Court by majority by 4 to 1 majority struck down clauses(4) and (5) of the article 368 inserted by 42nd Amendment, on the ground that these clauses destroyed the essential feature of the basic structure of the constitution. It was ruled by court that a limited amending power itself is a basic feature of the Constitution
In Minerva Mills case[10] the Supreme Court by majority by 4 to 1 majority struck down clauses(4) and (5) of the article 368 inserted by 42nd Amendment, on the ground that these clauses destroyed the essential feature of the basic structure of the constitution. It was ruled by court that a limited amending power itself is a basic feature of the Constitution
In L. Chandra Kumar case, a larger Bench of
seven Judges unequivocally declared "That the power of judicial review
over legislative action vested in the High Courts under Article 226 and in the
Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution is an integral and essential
feature of the Constitution, constituting part of its basic structure".
Conclusion
Now we can say, there is no hard and fast
rule for basic feature of the Constitution. Different judge keep different
views regarding to theory of basis structure. But at one point they have
similar view that parliament has no power to destroy, alter, or emasculate the
'basic structure' or framework of the constitution. ?If the historical
background, the preamble, the entire scheme of the constitution and the
relevant provisions thereof including article 368 are kept in mind then there
can be no difficulty, in determining what are the basic elements of the basic
structure of the constitution. These words apply with greater force to doctrine
of the basic structure, because, the federal and democratic structure of the
constitution, the separation of powers, the secular character of our state are
very much more definite than either negligence or natural justice.?[12].So for
the protection of welfare state, fundamental rights, Unity and integrity of the
nation, Sovereign democratic republic and for Liberty of thought, expression,
belief, faith and worship, interpretation of judiciary is mandatory. We can say
none is above constitution even parliament and judiciary.
No comments:
Post a Comment