Title: The Basic Structure Doctrine:

A Counter Majoritarian Difficulty?

- Abhinav K Shukla
Introduction: “The amending power cannot be exercised
in such a manner as to destroy or emasculate the basic or
fundamental feature of the constitution. A constitutional
amendment which offends the basic structure of the
constitution is ultra vires”.
With these observations, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
propounded the basic structure doctrine. Although the doctrine
has survived for nearly five decades and will likely survive for
generations to come, but a fundamental question has been in
discourse very often that whether the doctrine is a counter
majoritarian difficulty?
 Key Components:

• Evolution of the Basic Structure Doctrine.

• A Modern feature of Constitutionalism.
• Impact of the Doctrine on Indian Democracy.
• Judicial Activism vis a vis Judicial Overreach.
• The Majoritarian Premise.
• The Farsightedness of the Doctrine.
 The Fors and Against of the Basic
Structure:
• Fors:
➢Savior of democracy.
➢Clarity on the Amending Powers of the
Parliament.
• Against:
➢Judicial Overreach.
➢Rejection of the Majoritarian Premise: Elected
v. Unelected Rulers.
 Case Laws:
• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala: The
Propounder
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain: The Application
Begins.
• Minerva Mills v. Union of India: Another failed
attempt to incapacitate the doctrine.
• 4th Judges Case: The latest interpretation and
addition to the basic structure.
 Conclusion:
• The basic structure doctrine is one of the most
significant development in the constitutional law.
• The beauty of the judgment lies in the very
balancing approach being adopted that it allowed
the Parliament to amend any given provision of
the constitution thus making it flexible, but at the
same time also making it rigid by invoking the
doctrine.
• It is certainly not a counter majoritarian difficulty.