Parliamentary Sovereignty in India | Important Acts and Laws for Judiciary Exams PDF Download

Introduction

• Parliamentary sovereignty in India denotes the supremacy of the Parliament in the legislative domain, allowing it to enact or revoke laws without undue interference from other branches of government.
• Although not expressly articulated in the Indian Constitution, parliamentary sovereignty is a fundamental principle inferred from the overall structure and provisions of the Constitution.

Is there Parliamentary Sovereignty in India?

In India, the concept of parliamentary sovereignty is not absolute and is subject to specific constitutional constraints. Unlike in certain other nations where parliamentary sovereignty stands as a foundational principle, the Indian Constitution has established a system that acknowledges a balance of powers among various branches of the government.

Key Aspects of Limitation of Parliamentary Sovereignty in India

Nature of the Indian Constitution

• The Indian Constitution is a written document that serves as the supreme law of India.
• It establishes fundamental principles, rules, and restrictions for Parliament.
• These provisions are legally enforceable and cannot be changed through regular legislative processes.
• Example: The Constitution of India guarantees the right to equality for all citizens.

Federal System of Government

• India follows a federal system with powers divided between the central government and states.
• Parliament's sovereignty is limited to subjects in the Union List and cannot legislate on State List matters.
• During emergencies, Parliament may legislate on State List subjects, as seen in the S.R. Bommai case.
• Example: The GST (Goods and Services Tax) is a law enacted by both the central and state governments.

Judicial Review

• Laws passed by Parliament must undergo judicial review for constitutionality.
• The judiciary can declare laws void if they violate constitutional provisions.
• Example: The Supreme Court declared certain provisions of the NJAC Act unconstitutional.

Fundamental Rights

• Part III of the Indian Constitution guarantees fundamental rights that are legally enforceable.
• Parliament cannot pass laws that infringe upon these fundamental rights.
• Example: The right to freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution.

Presidential Veto Limits

• The President's assent is necessary to convert a bill into law.
• The President has veto powers that act as a check on Parliament's sovereignty.
• Example: The President can send a bill back to Parliament for reconsideration.

Constitutional Provisions Affecting Parliamentary Sovereignty in India

• Judicial Review of Laws: Article 13 of the Indian Constitution enables the judiciary to review laws to ensure they are consistent with fundamental rights. If a law contradicts these rights, it is considered void. For example, if a law discriminates against a specific group, the judiciary can declare it unconstitutional.
• Equality Before the Law: Article 14 establishes the principle of equality before the law, emphasizing that all individuals are equal in the eyes of the law. This provision prevents Parliament from passing laws that discriminate against certain groups. For instance, it ensures that no one is above the law and that justice is served equally to all.
• Power to Amend the Constitution: Article 368 grants Parliament the authority to amend the Constitution by adding, changing, or repealing provisions through a specified process. This flexibility allows for necessary updates to the Constitution while ensuring that changes undergo a deliberative procedure. For instance, amendments must follow a set protocol to maintain the integrity of the Constitution.
• Supremacy of the Constitution: Article 49(1) establishes the Indian Constitution as the highest law of the land. This provision emphasizes that no law passed by Parliament should contradict the Constitution's principles. It serves as a check on parliamentary actions, ensuring they align with constitutional values. For example, if a proposed law contradicts a fundamental principle of the Constitution, it can be deemed unconstitutional by the judiciary.
• Establishment of the Supreme Court: Article 124(1) outlines the establishment of the Supreme Court in India, which acts as the ultimate judicial authority. The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in upholding constitutional principles and testing laws for their constitutionality. For instance, if a law passed by Parliament is challenged in court, the Supreme Court evaluates its alignment with the Constitution.
• Judicial Role in Testing Constitutionality: The judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, is responsible for testing laws to ensure they comply with the Constitution. This process ensures that parliamentary actions are in line with constitutional norms. For example, if a law infringes upon a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution, the judiciary can declare it unconstitutional.
• Limits on Delegated Legislative Power: While Parliament can delegate legislative authority to a certain extent, there are limits to this delegation. Beyond a specified point, such delegation is considered invalid. This boundary ensures that essential legislative functions remain within the constitutional framework. For instance, Parliament cannot transfer its core legislative responsibilities to external bodies beyond a certain threshold.

Case Analysis on Parliamentary Sovereignty in India

• Minerva Mills Case (Minerva Mills v. Union of India, 1980)
  • In the Minerva Mills Case, the Supreme Court of India emphasized that all branches of the government — the executive, judiciary, and legislature — are bound by the constitution. This ruling highlighted the principle that no branch of the government is superior to the constitution, emphasizing the idea of constitutional supremacy.
• Golaknath Case (Golaknath v. State of Punjab, 1967)
  • The Golaknath case focused on the limits of parliamentary authority to amend fundamental rights. The court's decision stated that Parliament lacks the power to modify fundamental rights, establishing the significance of safeguarding certain core rights against legislative changes.
• Keshavananda Bharati Case (Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973)
  • The Keshavananda Bharati case stands out as a landmark ruling that influenced the constitutional framework of India. It introduced the concept of the "basic structure" of the Constitution, indicating that any laws or amendments conflicting with this basic structure would be deemed invalid.
  • This decision aimed to maintain a balance between Parliament's authority to amend laws and the protection of citizens' fundamental rights. It established a precedent for the judiciary to scrutinize constitutional amendments to ensure they do not compromise the core essence of the Constitution.

Conclusion

• In conclusion, while the Parliament holds significant authority in legislation, its power is not unchecked in India. The Constitution reigns supreme, and Parliament is bound to adhere to its provisions. Judicial rulings, particularly those safeguarding fundamental rights, serve as additional checks on parliamentary sovereignty.
• The Constitution establishes a framework where everyone, including Parliament, is subject to the law. Therefore, while Parliament plays a crucial role, it cannot operate without constraints. This underscores that parliamentary sovereignty in India is not absolute; rather, there are regulations and boundaries in place to ensure the protection of everyone's rights. This setup highlights that Parliament's authority is circumscribed by the rules delineated in the Constitution.