Question

Statement 1: A constitutional amendment bill can be introduced by a private member, but only in the Lok Sabha.
Statement 2: If a bill seeks to amend provisions related to the Supreme Court, it must be ratified by the legislatures of half of the states by a simple majority.

Which of the following statements are true?

• A. Both statements are true
• B. Both statements are false
• C. Only Statement 1 is true
• D. Only Statement 2 is true

Answer 1

Answer:

D. Only Statement 2 is true

Constitutional Amendment Bills in India

• The process of amending the Indian Constitution is outlined in Article 368 of Part XX. This article empowers the Parliament to amend the Constitution, but not to alter its basic structure (as established by the Kesavananda Bharati case, 1973).

• There are three ways in which the Constitution can be amended:

  • Simple majority of Parliament: Many provisions are amended by a simple majority, similar to ordinary legislation. These are technically outside the scope of Article 368.

  • Special majority of Parliament: The majority of provisions are amended by a special majority, meaning a majority of the total membership of each House and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting in each House.

  • Special majority of Parliament and ratification by states: Certain provisions, which have a federal character, require a special majority of Parliament and also the ratification by not less than one-half of the state legislatures by a simple majority.

Analysis of Statement 1: Introduction of a Constitutional Amendment Bill

• Statement 1: A constitutional amendment bill can be introduced by a private member, but only in the Lok Sabha.

• This statement is incorrect.

• A constitutional amendment bill can be introduced by either a minister (a government bill) or a private member (any MP who is not a minister).

• Such a bill can be introduced in either House of Parliament – the Lok Sabha (House of the People) or the Rajya Sabha (Council of States). There is no restriction to introduce it only in the Lok Sabha.

• Furthermore, no prior recommendation of the President is required for introducing a constitutional amendment bill.

• Each House must pass the bill separately by a special majority.

Analysis of Statement 2: Ratification by States for Amending Supreme Court Provisions

• Statement 2: If a bill seeks to amend provisions related to the Supreme Court, it must be ratified by the legislatures of half of the states by a simple majority.

• This statement is correct.

• Provisions that relate to the federal structure of the Constitution require not only a special majority of Parliament but also the consent of at least half of the state legislatures. This is done to uphold the federal principle.

• Such ratification by the state legislatures is carried out by a simple majority (a majority of the members present and voting) in each state assembly.

• The Constitution does not prescribe a time limit within which the states must ratify or reject the bill.

• Examples of provisions requiring state ratification include:

  • The election of the President and its manner.

  • The extent of the executive power of the Union and the states.

  • Provisions concerning the Supreme Court and the High Courts.

  • The distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the states.

  • Any of the lists in the Seventh Schedule (Union List, State List, Concurrent List).

  • Representation of states in Parliament.

  • The power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and the procedure thereof (Article 368 itself).