Doctrine of Basic Structure

ABSTRACT The Basic Structure Doctrine, enshrined in the seminal Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973, is a bulwark of Indian constitutional law that circumscribes Parliament's authority under Article 368 to alter the Constitution without amending its essential structure. The doctrine ensures that fundamental tenets like the superiority of the Constitution, rule of law, separation of powers, judicial review, federalism, secularism, and safeguarding of basic rights are not touched. Emerging from previous judicial reasoning in cases such as Shankari Prasad (1951), Sajjan Singh (1965), and I.C. Golaknath (1967), the doctrine responds to the dilemma between parliamentary sovereignty and constitutional integrity. It has been pivotal to transformative constitutionalism, allowing the Constitution to evolve in response to changes in society without jeopardizing its founding ethos. Classic judgments such as Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), National Judicial Appointments Commission (2015), and Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), have solidified the doctrine's function in ensuring judicial independence and social justice. Though detractors claim it involves overmuch judicial power, the doctrine is still a necessary bulwark against arbitrary amendments, ensuring constitutional flexibility within rigidity. It uses the doctrinal research method, examining the judgments and legal literature to evaluate the impact of the doctrine and how it interacts with transformative constitutionalism, providing suggestions for preserving this fine balance. Keywords: Basic Structure Doctrine, Kesavananda Bharati, Transformative Constitutionalism, Judicial Review, Constitutional Amendments