Political Science · Ch 13 — The Crisis of Democratic Order
Conflict with Judiciary
Conflict with Judiciary
The conflict between the government and the judiciary during this period was not a single dispute but a series of constitutional and political clashes that escalated over several years. At its core was a fundamental disagreement about the limits of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution.
Three constitutional issues lay at the heart of this long-drawn conflict, which you studied last year. First, could Parliament abridge Fundamental Rights? The Supreme Court said it could not. Second, could Parliament curtail the right to property by passing a constitutional amendment? Again, the Court ruled that Parliament could not amend the Constitution in a way that curtailed rights. Third, Parliament amended the Constitution to say that it could abridge Fundamental Rights in order to give effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy. The Supreme Court rejected this provision as well.
This series of rulings created a crisis in the relationship between the government and the judiciary. The crisis culminated in the famous Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). In this landmark decision, the Supreme Court held that there are certain basic features of the Constitution — such as the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, and judicial review — which Parliament cannot amend or destroy. This "basic structure doctrine" placed a permanent limit on Parliament's amending power.
Two specific developments after the Kesavananda Bharati decision further inflamed tensions between the judiciary and the executive.
The basic structure doctrine established in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) is a cornerstone of Indian constitutional law. It means that even a constitutional amendment passed by a huge majority can be struck down if it destroys the Constitution's essential framework.
The first development was the appointment of the Chief Justice of India. Immediately after the Supreme Court's 1973 decision, a vacancy arose for the post of Chief Justice. It had been an established practice to appoint the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court to this position. However, in 1973, the government set aside the seniority of three judges and appointed Justice A. N. Ray as Chief Justice. This appointment became politically controversial because all three judges who were superseded had given rulings against the government's stand in the Kesavananda Bharati case. Constitutional interpretations and political ideologies were now getting rapidly mixed up. …