Navigating Constitutional Change: A Cross-Jurisdictional Examination of Amendment Procedures in India, France, and the USA

This research paper conducts a comparative analysis of the constitutional amendment mechanisms in India, France, and the United States, highlighting the delicate balance between rigidity and flexibility essential for constitutional longevity and adaptability. The paper explores the distinct frameworks each country employs to amend its constitution, reflecting on how these systems uphold or challenge democratic principles and responsive governance. By examining the procedural intricacies and historical amendment instances in each context, this study elucidates the underlying principles that govern the modification processes and assesses their effectiveness in responding to evolving socio-political demands. This comparative approach not only sheds light on the diverse strategies nations utilize to maintain constitutional relevance in changing times but also offers insights into the broader implications of amendment rigidity versus flexibility on global constitutionalism.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.69980/ajpr.v28i5.375
Primary Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Navigating Constitutional Change: A Cross-Jurisdictional Examination of Amendment Procedures in India, France, and the USA

Partho Halder, Rekha Kumari R. Singh, Manish Kumar
American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
article

Navigating Constitutional Change: A Cross-Jurisdictional Examination of Amendment Procedures in India, France, and the USA

Partho Halder, Rekha Kumari R. Singh, Manish Kumar
article en

Abstract

This research paper conducts a comparative analysis of the constitutional amendment mechanisms in India, France, and the United States, highlighting the delicate balance between rigidity and flexibility essential for constitutional longevity and adaptability. The paper explores the distinct frameworks each country employs to amend its constitution, reflecting on how these systems uphold or challenge democratic principles and responsive governance. By examining the procedural intricacies and historical amendment instances in each context, this study elucidates the underlying principles that govern the modification processes and assesses their effectiveness in responding to evolving socio-political demands. This comparative approach not only sheds light on the diverse strategies nations utilize to maintain constitutional relevance in changing times but also offers insights into the broader implications of amendment rigidity versus flexibility on global constitutionalism.

American Journal of Psychiatric RehabilitationVol. 28(5)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.