Question

Consider the following statements regarding the criticisms of the amendment procedure of the Indian Constitution:

1. A major criticism is the absence of a provision for a joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament to resolve a deadlock over a constitutional amendment bill.

2. The Constitution clearly specifies that states cannot withdraw their approval for an amendment bill once it has been given.

3. The power to initiate a constitutional amendment is vested exclusively with the Parliament.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

• A. 1 and 2 only
• B. 2 and 3 only
• C. 1 and 3 only
• D. 1, 2 and 3

Answer 1

Answer:

C. 1 and 3 only

Amendment Procedure of the Indian Constitution (Article 368)

• The Indian Constitution is known for being a unique blend of flexibility and rigidity, a characteristic largely defined by its amendment procedure.

• Article 368 of the Constitution outlines the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and the procedure required for such amendments.

• There are mainly three ways an amendment can be made:

  1. By a simple majority of Parliament (outside the scope of Article 368).

  2. By a special majority of Parliament (as per Article 368).

  3. By a special majority of Parliament and the ratification by half of the state legislatures (as per Article 368).

Criticisms of the Amendment Procedure

• Absence of Joint Sitting for Deadlocks: One significant criticism is that the Indian Constitution does not provide for a joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha) to resolve a deadlock over a constitutional amendment bill.

  • This contrasts with ordinary legislation, where a joint sitting can be convened under Article 108 if there's a disagreement between the two Houses.

  • The absence of such a provision for constitutional amendment bills means that if one House rejects the bill passed by the other, or makes amendments that are not agreed upon, the bill simply lapses, potentially leading to a stalemate.

• Exclusive Power to Initiate Amendments with Parliament: The power to initiate a constitutional amendment is vested exclusively with the Parliament.

  • This means that an amendment bill can only be introduced in either the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha.

  • State legislatures do not have the power to initiate a constitutional amendment, nor is there a provision for popular initiative (referendum) in India for constitutional amendments, unlike some other countries.

  • This highlights the centralisation of constituent power in the hands of the Union Parliament.

• Silence on State's Withdrawal of Ratification: The Constitution is silent on whether states can withdraw their approval for a constitutional amendment bill once it has been given.

  • When an amendment requires ratification by state legislatures (for matters affecting federal structure), the states convey their assent. However, there's no clear constitutional provision regarding the possibility or procedure for withdrawing such assent.

  • This ambiguity is often cited as a flaw in the amendment process.

• No Special Body for Constitutional Amendments: Unlike some other countries (e.g., the USA), there is no separate special body or constituent assembly established for the purpose of amending the Constitution. Parliament itself exercises the constituent power.

• Flexibility in Ratification by States: For amendments requiring state ratification, the Constitution mandates ratification by 'not less than one-half of the State Legislatures' by a simple majority.

  • Critics argue that a simple majority for ratification by states, even for crucial federal matters, makes the process somewhat less rigid than it appears, as states are not required to approve by a special majority within their own legislatures.

• Presidential Assent is Obligatory: After a constitutional amendment bill is passed by both Houses of Parliament and, where necessary, ratified by the states, it is presented to the President for assent.

  • The 24th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1971 made it obligatory for the President to give his assent to a constitutional amendment bill, thereby depriving the President of any veto power over such bills. This means the President cannot withhold assent or return the bill for reconsideration.