Describe the procedure for amending the constitution? What is the criticism against it?

Question

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

Under Article 368, an amendment bill is introduced only in Parliament, passed by a special majority in each House, ratified by half the states if federal provisions are affected, and then receives mandatory Presidential assent. Critics cite the weak role of states, no ratification deadline and no joint sitting.

**Introduction**

The Indian Constitution⟦2⟧⟦1⟧’s amendment procedure, under Article 368, ensures adaptability while safeguarding its Basic Structure Doctrine⟦3⟧, as affirmed in Kesavananda Bharati (1973). This balance allows the Constitution to evolve with changing times. However, it faces criticism over federal imbalance and procedural lacunae that affect its effectiveness and inclusiveness.

**Procedure for Amending the Constitution**

SKETCH: flow | Constitutional Amendment Procedure  
- Introduction of Bill in Parliament  
- Passage by Special Majority in Both Houses  
- Ratification by Half of State Legislatures (if required)  
- Presidential Assent and Enactment

1. **Parliamentary Initiation and Special Majority**: Amendments can only be introduced in Parliament by ministers or private members and require a special majority, meaning a majority of total members plus two-thirds of those present and voting. There is no provision for joint sittings to resolve deadlocks between the two Houses, unlike ordinary legislation.

2. **State Ratification for Federal Provisions**: Amendments affecting federal features such as the President’s election, state representation in Parliament, or distribution of powers require ratification by at least half the state legislatures by simple majority. There is no prescribed time limit for this ratification, which risks indefinite delays and uncertainty in constitutional reforms.

**Criticisms of the Procedure**

4. **Political Misuse and Basic Structure Clash**: The 130th Amendment Bill (2025) highlights tensions between parliamentary supremacy and the Basic Structure Doctrine, as it sought automatic removal of ministers, raising concerns about bypassing constitutional safeguards and judicial review.

**Way Forward**

6. **Mandate Time Limits for Ratification**: Introducing deadlines for state ratification would prevent indefinite delays and enhance the predictability and efficiency of the amendment process.

**Conclusion**

The amendment process’s flexibility is vital for constitutional evolution but must be reformed to prevent misuse, strengthen federal participation, and uphold the Constitution’s transformative role and accountability.

Describe the procedure for amending the constitution? What is the criticism against it?

Model answer

Practise this question

Judiciary in India15 questions

Ghissu