The amendment procedure of the Indian Constitution, as outlined in Article 368, has been subject

to various criticisms over the years. Here's an analysis of these criticisms across ten dimensions with
relevant data and facts:

Complexity and Rigidity:

Critics argue that the amendment process is overly complex and rigid. The requirement of a
special majority in Parliament and, in some cases, state ratification can impede necessary
changes.
Fact: The Indian Constitution has been amended over 100 times since its adoption, indicating
that the process is not so rigid as to prevent changes.
Lack of Public Participation:
Critics contend that the procedure lacks public participation and is predominantly controlled by
the political elite.
Fact: Unlike some modern constitutions that include provisions for citizen initiatives, the Indian
Constitution amendment process is entirely within the purview of Parliament and state
legislatures.
Amendments Undermining Federalism:
Some argue that amendments have been used to centralize power, diluting the federal
structure.
Fact: The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, is often cited as an example of an amendment that
centralized power by making several changes, including to the relationship between the states
and the center.
Abuse of Amendment Powers:
Critics claim that the amendment power has been misused by the government to pursue its
political agenda, sometimes at the expense of constitutional principles.
Fact: The 39th Amendment Act, 1975, which attempted to insulate election-related matters
from judicial review, was criticized as an example of such misuse.
Impact on Fundamental Rights:
Amendments have been criticized for affecting Fundamental Rights. For instance, the 42nd
Amendment Act, 1976, introduced provisions that curtailed some Fundamental Rights.
Fact: The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, was enacted to correct some of these changes and
restore certain Fundamental Rights.
Delay in Amendment:
The process can be time-consuming, leading to delays in implementing necessary reforms.
Fact: The Goods and Services Tax (GST) was proposed in the early 2000s but took nearly two
decades to be implemented due to political and procedural challenges in amending the
Constitution.
Impact on Minority Rights:
Some critics argue that amendments have not adequately protected minority rights.
Fact: The 93rd Amendment Act, 2005, which introduced the reservation for Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, and socially and educationally backward classes in educational institutions,
has faced criticism regarding its implementation and impact on minority rights.
Lack of Clarity on "Basic Structure":
The doctrine of the "basic structure" of the Constitution, as established by the Supreme Court,
is criticized for being somewhat vague and subjective, potentially leading to differing
interpretations.
Fact: The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) laid the foundation for the basic structure doctrine
but did not provide a comprehensive list of what constitutes the basic structure.
Challenges in State Ratification:
Requiring state ratification for certain amendments can be challenging, as obtaining the
consent of multiple states may be difficult.
Fact: The 115th Amendment Act, which aimed to ratify the India-Bangladesh Land Boundary
Agreement, faced challenges as not all states easily agreed to the proposed territorial changes.
Inadequate Review Mechanism:
Critics argue that there is no clear mechanism for independent review of amendments, leaving
the process entirely within the domain of the political class.
Fact: While the Supreme Court can review amendments and declare them unconstitutional if
they violate the basic structure of the Constitution, this power is subject to interpretation and
may not always provide a definitive check.

In summary, while the amendment procedure of the Indian Constitution has enabled significant
changes over the years, it has faced criticism on various fronts, including complexity, rigidity,
potential misuse, and impact on fundamental rights. Balancing the need for constitutional stability
with the necessity for reform remains a complex challenge.