EXERCISES
Exercise 1: Choose the correct statement from the following.
A constitution needs to be amended from time to time because,
● Circumstances change and require suitable changes in the constitution.
● A document written at one point of time becomes outdated after some time.
● Every generation should have a constitution of its own liking.
● It must reflect the philosophy of the existing government.
Answer: The correct option is a. Circumstances change and require suitable changes in the constitution.
Explanation: A constitution is a “living document,” which means it must be able to adapt to the changing needs and conditions of society. As society progresses and new challenges arise, the constitution may need to be amended to remain relevant and effective. It is not meant to be completely rewritten for every generation or to serve the interests of a particular government, but rather to evolve while keeping its core principles intact.
Exercise 2: Write True / False against the following statements.
a. The President cannot send back an amendment bill for reconsideration of Parliament.
Answer: True.
Explanation: Unlike ordinary bills, a constitutional amendment bill, once passed by both Houses of Parliament with the required special majority, must be given assent by the President. The President does not have the power to send it back for reconsideration. This ensures that the process of amending the constitution, which requires a broad consensus in Parliament, is not delayed.
b. Elected representatives alone have the power to amend the Constitution.
Answer: True.
Explanation: The power to initiate and pass amendments to the Constitution lies with the Parliament, which is composed of elected representatives of the people. This upholds the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, where the will of the people, expressed through their elected representatives, is supreme in matters of constitutional reform.
c. The Judiciary cannot initiate the process of constitutional amendment but can effectively change the Constitution by interpreting it differently.
Answer: True.
Explanation: While the judiciary cannot start the formal process of amending the Constitution, its interpretations can significantly impact how the Constitution is understood and applied. Through landmark judgments, such as the introduction of the “basic structure” doctrine, the judiciary has shaped the evolution of the Constitution without formal amendments.
d. Parliament can amend any section of the Constitution.
Answer: False.
Explanation: The Supreme Court, in the Kesavananda Bharati case, ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its “basic structure.” This means that fundamental principles like democracy, secularism, and federalism are protected from being amended, placing a crucial limit on Parliament’s amending power.
Exercise 3: Which of the following are involved in the amendment of the Indian Constitution? In what way are they involved?
a. Voters
c. State Legislatures
d. Parliament
e. Governors
f. Judiciary
Answer:
● Parliament: Parliament plays the primary role in the amendment process. An amendment bill can only be introduced in either House of Parliament, and it must be passed by a special majority in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
● State Legislatures: In cases where an amendment affects the federal structure of the Constitution, such as the distribution of powers between the Centre and the states, it must be ratified by the legislatures of at least half of the states.
● President of India: The President’s role is to give assent to the amendment bill after it has been passed by Parliament (and, if required, ratified by the states). Once the President gives assent, the bill becomes an act.
● Judiciary: The judiciary is involved in the amendment process through its power of judicial review. It can examine whether an amendment violates the basic structure of the Constitution and can declare it unconstitutional if it does.
● Voters, and Governors are not directly involved in the process of amending the constitution.
Exercise 4: You have read in this chapter that the 42nd amendment was one of the most controversial amendments so far. Which of the following were the reasons for this controversy?
a. It was made during national emergency, and the declaration of that emergency was itself controversial.
b. It was made without the support of special majority.
c. It was made without ratification by State legislatures.
d. It contained provisions, which were controversial.
Answer: The reasons for the controversy surrounding the 42nd Amendment were a and d.
Explanation: The 42nd Amendment was highly controversial primarily because it was passed during the internal emergency (1975-1977), a period when democratic rights were suspended and opposition leaders were jailed. Additionally, the amendment itself contained highly contentious provisions. It sought to drastically alter the Constitution, giving immense power to the executive, restricting the powers of the judiciary, and changing the Preamble. It was seen as an attempt to undermine the basic principles of Indian democracy.
Exercise 5: Which of the following is not a reasonable explanation of the conflict between the legislature and the judiciary over different amendments?
a. Different interpretations of the Constitution are possible.
b. In a democracy, debates and differences are natural.
c. The Constitution has given higher importance to certain rules and principles and also allowed for amendment by special majority.
d. Legislature cannot be entrusted to protect the rights of the citizens.
e. Judiciary can only decide the constitutionality of a particular law; cannot resolve political debates about its need.
Answer: The correct option is d. Legislature cannot be entrusted to protect the rights of the citizens.
Explanation: The conflict between the legislature and the judiciary often arises from differing interpretations of the Constitution, which is a natural part of a healthy democracy. The judiciary’s role is to ensure that laws, including constitutional amendments, do not violate the fundamental principles of the Constitution. Stating that the legislature cannot be trusted to protect citizens’ rights is an unreasonable generalization and oversimplifies the complex relationship between these two pillars of democracy.
Exercise 6: Identify the correct statements about the theory of basic structure. Correct the incorrect statements.
a. The Constitution specifies the basic tenets.
b. Legislature can amend all parts of the Constitution except the basic structure.
c. Judiciary has defined which aspects of the Constitution can be termed as the basic structure and which cannot.
d. This theory found its first expression in the Kesavananda Bharati case and has been discussed in subsequent judgments.
e. This theory has increased the powers of the judiciary and has come to be accepted by different political parties and the government.
Answer:
● a. Incorrect. The Constitution does not explicitly list the components of its basic structure. The theory of the basic structure is a judicial innovation.
● b. Correct. This statement accurately describes the core principle of the basic structure doctrine.
● c. Incorrect. The judiciary has not provided an exhaustive list of what constitutes the basic structure. Instead, it has identified certain principles like the supremacy of the Constitution, rule of law, and judicial review as parts of the basic structure on a case-by-case basis.
● d. Correct. The Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973 is the landmark judgment where the Supreme Court first articulated the basic structure doctrine.
● e. Correct. The theory has indeed enhanced the judiciary’s power of review over constitutional amendments and has gained widespread acceptance within India’s political and legal systems.
Exercise 7: From the information that many amendments were made during 2000-2003, which of the following conclusions would you draw?
a. The Judiciary did not interfere in the amendments made during this period.
b. One political party had a strong majority during this period.
c. There was strong pressure from the public in favour of certain amendments.
d. There were no real differences among the parties during this time.
e. The amendments were of a non-controversial nature and parties had an agreement on the subject of amendments.
Answer: The correct option is e. The amendments were of a non-controversial nature and parties had an agreement on the subject of amendments.
Explanation: The period between 2000 and 2003 was characterized by coalition politics, meaning no single party had a dominant majority. The fact that several amendments were passed during this time suggests that there was a broad political consensus on the issues they addressed. These amendments were likely non-controversial, allowing different political parties to come to an agreement and pass them without significant opposition.
Exercise 8: Explain the reason for requiring special majority for amending the Constitution.
Answer: Requiring a special majority for amending the Constitution serves two main purposes. First, it ensures that any change to the fundamental law of the land is made with a broad consensus among the elected representatives, rather than by a simple majority that might represent a temporary political advantage. This makes the Constitution more stable and prevents it from being altered for narrow partisan reasons. Second, it reinforces the idea that the Constitution is a supreme document, placed above ordinary laws, and should not be changed without careful consideration and widespread agreement.
Exercise 9: Many amendments to the Constitution of India have been made due to different interpretations upheld by the Judiciary and Parliament. Explain with examples.
Answer: The Indian Constitution has been amended multiple times to clarify provisions that have been subject to conflicting interpretations by the Parliament and the Judiciary. A prominent example is the series of amendments related to the right to property and its relationship with the Directive Principles of State Policy.
Initially, the judiciary interpreted the fundamental right to property in a way that restricted the government’s ability to enact land reforms. To overcome these judicial pronouncements, Parliament passed several amendments, including the First and Fourth Amendments, to assert its authority to legislate on such matters for the public good. This ongoing tension culminated in the 44th Amendment, which removed the right to property as a fundamental right altogether, turning it into a legal right. This history shows how differing interpretations can lead to constitutional amendments as Parliament seeks to establish its legislative will as the definitive interpretation.
Exercise 10: If amending power is with the elected representatives, judiciary should NOT have the power to decide the validity of amendments. Do you agree? Give your reasons in 100 words.
Answer: I do not agree with this statement. While elected representatives in Parliament have the power to amend the Constitution, the judiciary’s power to review the validity of these amendments is essential for maintaining constitutional supremacy and protecting democracy. The judiciary acts as a check on the power of the legislature, ensuring that amendments do not violate the “basic structure” of the Constitution. Without this judicial oversight, a government with a large majority could potentially alter the Constitution in ways that undermine fundamental rights and democratic principles. Therefore, the judiciary’s role is crucial for preserving the core values of the Constitution.
