Doctrine of Basic Feature or Structure

1. Possibility of invoking Spirit of Constitution as Limitation on Legislature

   Works in two ways:

   Table of Contents

   Toggle

   1. FirstIt has not constituted any limitation at legislature while enacting an ordinary law.

      Means, while determining validity of an ordinary law, the court can only look into express provisions or necessary implications.

   2. SecondIt would only operate as limitation on the constituent body.

      Means, when looking into validity of constitutional amendment, court may travel behind and beyond express provision to find whether imposed amendments are in tune with such constitutional principles so invoked.

2. Basic Doctrine Constitutes

   1. FirstWritten constitution which is needed to prevent absolutism and arbitrary government.
   2. SecondConstitution must constitute the higher law which impose legal limitation upon lawmaking power of legislature.

      If law transgresses such limitation, it would be null and void.

   3. ThirdAttributes of supremacy belong to constitution as well as its amendments, provided such amendments are in accordance with procedure.
   4. FourthConstitution is not merely higher power or law but the highest power or law adopted by people to limit organs of government.
   5. FifthTo assume constituent power to make and amend constitution need to be under greater limitation than power to make and amend ordinary law,

      As such constitution was made by the people of India, the ultimate sovereigns of the nation.

3. Note (A. K. Gopalan case)

   Any legislative or constituent power, any constitutional limitation upon either must be derived from words of constitution alone,

   ---

   ---

   And not from any supposed spirit of constitution outside constitution held in A. K. Gopalan case.
   

4. Justice Ray J. – Principle of Constitutional Interpretation

   1. Golden Rule of Construction

      Justice Ray J. held:

      A well-settled principle of constitution precludes limiting the language of constitution by political, juristic, and social concept independently of the language of constitution to be interpreted.

      If the text is explicit and the text is conclusive, alike in what it directs and what it forbids, it cannot be limited by external concepts.
      This is the golden rule of construction of a written constitution.

   2. Nature of Fundamental Rights

      Fundamental rights are social rights conferred by constitution.

      There is no law of constitution.

      The constitution does not recognize any type of law as natural law.

Criticism to the Basic Doctrine Principle (Kesavananda Bharati case)

The basic doctrine principle was seen as appealing to a higher preferred power, much like natural law.

This idea/doctrine was criticized as:

• A Pandora’s box, due to its lack of non-ambiguity.
• One could appeal to anything as “spirit of constitution,” which was not defined in explicit text.
• Rather, it resembled reliance on natural law.

Foreign Inspiration (West Germany precedent)

The judgment was inspired from a West Germany precedent.

Germany had no constitution of its own, so the basic feature as an appeal to natural law made sense for such a nation.

Indian Context

It was held in west German precedent “Certain principles are so fundamental that law precedes even constitution.”

But in India:

• India had a constitution.
• Any law superior to constitution, even if natural justice, would amount to anarchism.