Critically examine Article 368 of Indian Constitution. - MAINS QUESTION - DAILY CURRENT AFFAIR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Tuesday, September 1, 2020

Critically examine Article 368 of Indian Constitution.

The constitution-makers have neither made the process of amending the constitution of India very easy nor very complicated very easy so that no autocratic power can rapidly amend it to its own interest and not make it too complicated so that in time Also in the changing economic social environment, desired changes can be made to meet the new expectations. The power to amend it was delegated to Parliament which represents all the people of India.
Parliament can also amend the constitution not by a simple majority but only by a special majority. If the amendment is related to the federal structure of India or the interest of the states, then approval of the states has also been made necessary. Article 368, referring to the power and procedure of the Parliament to amend the Constitution, states that the Parliament, using its constitutional power, may amend it by adding, changing or repealing any provision of the Constitution. The amendment of the constitution can be initiated only by introducing a bill in a House of Parliament. When that Bill is passed in each House of Parliament, the total of that House
If passed by a majority of the members' number and at least two-thirds majority of the members present and voting in that House, then it will be presented to the President, who will give his assent to the Bill. The constitution will be amended according to the provisions of that bill after the President's permission.

The main things that emerge after studying Article 368 are as follows:

1. The amendment of the constitution can be initiated only by introducing a bill in a House of Parliament, ie a bill that initiates the amendment of the constitution cannot be reestablished in the state legislature. It may be noted that the Constitution Amendment Bill can be introduced in any House of Parliament like any other Bill. The difference is that other Bills are passed by a simple majority of Parliament, while the Constitution Amendment Bill is passed by a special majority of Parliament (more than half of the total number of members and at least two-thirds majority of those present and voting). Occur.

2. In case of a General Bill, if a deadlock arises between the two Houses, then a provision of joint sitting of the two Houses is made in Article 108 of the Constitution, but in case of a Constitutional Amendment Bill, if there is a situation of stalemate between the two Houses If there is no provision for any such joint meeting, Article 368 of the Constitution.

3. Prior approval of the President is not necessary to reinstate the Constitutional Amendment Bill in Parliament, whereas many Ordinary Bills cannot be introduced in Parliament without the prior permission of the President.
As-Money Bills, Bills bringing changes in areas, boundaries or names etc. of states.

4. Like other Bills, reference to the Constitution Amendment Bill does not have any veto power. When a Constitutional Amendment Bill is presented to the President after it is passed by both the Houses, it will give its approval
Is bound to The provision relating to the compulsion to allow is contained in Article 368 by the 24th Constitution Amendment Act, 1971.

5. There is no mention in Article 368 by whom a bill related to the constitutional amendment will be introduced in a House. Therefore, such a bill can be introduced by any member of the government and non-government.

6. By adding clause (1) in Article 368, it has been clarified that Parliament can amend any provision of the Constitution as an addition, change or repeal. This provision amends the 24th constitution
The Act, 1971 was done when the Supreme Court ruled in the Golaknath case (1967) that Parliament did not have the power to refer to the debate over the nullification of the Fundamental Rights.
The right does not have the power to mitigate

7. In India, the main power of constitutional amendment has been delegated to the Parliament, whereas in the United States a provision has been made for the constitution of a separate Constituent Assembly.

The very next year after the Constitution came into force, it has been felt by the Government of India that in order to implement the Directive Principles of State Policy, it is necessary to put reasonable restrictions on the Fundamental Rights. Jawaharlal Nehru, while clarifying the objectives and reasons of the First Constitution Amendment Bill (1951), stated that some difficulties have arisen in the light of the decisions given by the court in the period of 15 months after the Constitution came into force. These difficulties are especially related to Part 3. The main objectives of this Amendment Bill are speech and expression, freedom and profession, livelihood, business -
Article 19 was to be amended to impose reasonable restrictions on freedom and the landlord
The laws related to abolition had to be given constitutional recognition.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Most Read

//disable Text Selection and Copying