Criticisms of the amendment procedure of the Indian Constitution
Q. Which of the following are criticisms of the amendment procedure of the Indian constitution?
1) The process is flexible as well as rigid.
2) The process of amendment is similar to that of a legislative process except for the special majority.
3) Parliament has almost the entire power to initiate amendments.
4) There is no provision for holding a joint sitting to solve deadlock in case of constitutional amendment bill.- Published on 23 Feb 17a. Only 1 and 2
b. Only 3 and 4
c. Only 2, 3 and 4
d. All of the above
ANSWER: Only 2, 3 and 4
- There is no provision for a special body like Constitutional Convention (as in USA) or Constitutional Assembly for amending the Constitution. The power is vested in the Parliament and only in few cases, in the state legislatures.
- The state legislatures cannot initiate any bill or proposal for amending the Constitution except in one case, that is, passing a resolution requesting the Parliament for the creation or abolition of legislative councils in the states.
- Here also, the Parliament can either approve or disapprove such a resolution or may not take any action on it.
- in few cases, the consent of the state legislatures is required and that too, only half of them, while in USA, it is three-fourths of the states.
- The Constitution does not prescribe the time frame within which the state legislatures should ratify or reject an amendment submitted to them.
- Also, it doesn’t talk on the issue whether the states can withdraw their approval after according the same.
- There is no provision for holding a joint sitting of both the Houses of Parliament if there is a deadlock over the passage of a constitutional amendment bill.
- The process of amendment is similar to that of a legislative process except for the special majority.
- The provisions relating to the amendment procedure are too ambiguous. Hence, they leave a wide scope for taking the matters to the judiciary.
- Despite these defects, it cannot be denied that the process has proved to be simple and easy and has succeeded in meeting the changed needs and conditions.
- The procedure is not so flexible as to allow the ruling parties to change it according to their moods and not so rigid as to be incapable of adapting itself to the changing needs.
