It is said that basic structure of the constitution is a myth. Explain with the help of post-1973 Constitutional Amendments.

Basic Structure Doctrine as a Judicial Check

The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament cannot alter democracy, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, or judicial independence, preserving constitutional identity and preventing authoritarian misuse of amending power.

42nd Amendment’s Challenge to Basic Structure

The 42nd Amendment (1976) curtailed judicial review, amended over 50 articles including the Preamble and Seventh Schedule, and sought to nullify the basic structure doctrine, asserting parliamentary supremacy during the Emergency.

Ambiguity in Defining Basic Structure

The Supreme Court’s lack of an exhaustive list creates fluidity, leading to debates on whether the doctrine is a myth or a flexible safeguard. This ambiguity allows judicial interpretation to evolve with political contexts.

Clearer Judicial Guidelines and Dialogue

The Court should clarify basic structure features to reduce uncertainty. Institutional dialogue between Parliament and judiciary can balance amendment powers and constitutional safeguards, preventing confrontations like those during the Emergency.

Strengthening Federalism in Telangana

Telangana’s statehood and local governance reforms underscore the need to protect federal principles within the basic structure, ensuring amendments respect regional autonomy and democratic decentralization.