The 43rd Amendment of Indian Constitution is officially known as the Constitution (Forty-third Amendment) Act, 1977. This Act repealed six articles that the 42nd Amendment had introduced to the Constitution.
The Indian National Congress, under the direction of Indira Gandhi, had passed these articles during the Emergency. The 43rd Amendment was passed by the newly elected Janata Party. The party had won the general elections in 1977 by promising to “restore the Constitution to the condition it was in before the Emergency.”
Read this to get in-depth knowledge about the 43rd amendment of Indian constitution.
What Is The 43rd Amendment Of Indian Constitution?
On April 13, 1978, the President approved the 43rd Amendment of Indian Constitution. The Janata government passed the Forty-third Amendment Act of 1977. This was carried out to undo the distortions brought about by the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976. Articles 145, 226, 228, and 366 are modified by this act. Whereas articles 31D, 32A, 131A, 144A, 226A, and 228A are removed.
- This Act nullifies the terrible 42nd Amendment fundamental rights law that was passed under the Emergency. By eliminating Article 31D, it restores civil liberties. Under the cover of anti-national activity prevention legislation, this gave Parliament the authority to restrict even legal union activity.
- Under the Constitution, the new law has been approved by more than half of the States. Additionally, this restores legislative powers for the states that adequately address anti-national activity while upholding fundamental rights. The judiciary was likewise put back in its proper place by the legislation.
- Now that the 42nd Amendment Act has been repealed, the Supreme Court will have the authority to declare state laws unlawful.
Also Read: 42nd Amendment Of Indian Constitution
Proposal And Enactment
On December 16, 1977, the Constitution (Forty-third Amendment) Act of 1977 was introduced in the Lok Sabha. It was first introduced as the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1977. Shanti Bhushan, Minister of Law, Justice, and Company Affairs introduced it. Articles 145, 228, and 366 were the targets of the bill’s amendments. Furthermore, it does not include the Constitution’s Articles 226A, 228A, 131A, 32A, 144A, or 31D.
The Lok Sabha discussed the bill on December 19 and 20. Later, on December 20, the Bill was passed when a formal constitutional amendment was adopted to change the word “forty-fourth” to “forty-third” in Clause 1. The Bill’s clauses 7 to 10 were subsequently renumbered as clauses 8 to 11. The Rajya Sabha later approved it on December 23, 1977.
Objects And Reasons
- Several new articles were added to the Constitution by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act of 1976. This was done to limit the Supreme Court’s and the High Court’s authority to examine the constitutionality of laws in both a direct and indirect manner. Article 32A forbade the Supreme Court from debating the constitutionality of any State law. This includes cases involving the enforcement of fundamental rights unless the constitutionality of any Central statute was also in dispute. According to Article 131A, the Supreme Court has sole authority to determine whether a Central statute is constitutional. The High Courts were thereby deprived of their authority over the matter. According to Article 144A, there must be a minimum of seven Supreme Court judges present while a Central law or a State law is being reviewed for constitutionality. Furthermore, a special majority of two-thirds was necessary for the statute to be declared illegal. The High Courts were not permitted to rule on the legality of any Central laws under Article 226A. A bench of at least five judges was necessary by Article 228A to decide whether any State statute was constitutional. This article also set forth a specific majority requirement for a judgment declaring such a statute unlawful.
- People who live in remote areas of India are said to experience suffering as a result of articles 32A, 131A, and 228A. Additionally, many proceedings would result from article 32A. Because the High Court must first examine issues involving the legality of State laws that could be decided by the Supreme Court itself. No matter how insignificant the challenge, the minimum number of judges in every case where the constitutionality of legislation is at issue wastes important judicial time by hearing and rejecting ineffective arguments. In M/s. Misrilal Jain v. the State of Orissa and Others (AIR 1977 SC 1686) the Supreme Court expressed the expectation that article 144A would prompt Parliament’s immediate response. Additionally, the law would be changed to provide the court the authority to choose the size of the bench that should hear a given case. As a matter of fact, many cases have been delayed in the High Courts and Supreme Court. This is because of the aforementioned articles.
- Articles 32A, 131A, 144A, 226A, and 228A are thus proposed to be deleted. Additionally, it is suggested that special provisions be made. This is done to allow the Supreme Court and the High Courts to handle pending cases in the same way as if the aforementioned articles had been deleted beginning on February 1st, 1977. (viz., the date on which those articles were brought into force). It is also suggested to make necessary consequential amendments to articles 145, 228, and 366.
- Parliament is given special power under Article 31D. These authorities are responsible for passing legislation pertaining to anti-national activities. The power of Parliament to enact laws to address anti-national conduct and anti-national groups is thought to be extremely broad. Moreover, have the potential for abuse. As a result, it is suggested that article 31D be removed.
- These are the goals that the bill aims to do.
|Who introduced 43rd Amendment Of Indian Constitution?||Shanti Bhushan, Minister of Law, Justice, and Company Affairs|
|When was it Introduced?||In the Lok Sabha on 16 December 1977|
|The official name of the 43rd Amendment Of Indian Constitution||The Constitution (Forty-third Amendment) Act, 1977|
|Which articles were amended by 43rd Amendment Of Indian Constitution?||Articles 145, 228 and 366|
|Which articles were omitted by 43rd Amendment Of Indian Constitution?||Articles 31D, 32A, 131A, 144A, 226A and 228A|
Six articles that had been added to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment were removed by the 43rd Amendment. Articles 31D, 32A, 131A, 144A, 226A, and 228A fall within this category. Articles 145, 228, and 366 were changed to allow the deletion of these six articles.
Legislation about “anti-national actions” and “anti-national associations” was made possible by Article 31D.
Article 32A of the Constitution provided that the constitutional validity of state laws would not be considered by the Supreme Court in writ proceedings for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. The said article has been omitted.
A similar ban on High Courts deliberating the constitutionality of Central laws was imposed by Article 226A. The said article has been omitted.
Section 4 omits article 131A relating to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in regard to questions as to the constitutional validity of Central laws.
A Central or State law could only be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court under Article 144A with a bench of at least 7 justices. Moreover, a two-thirds special majority of the bench is required.
Under Article 228A, a High Court could only declare a State law invalid if the decision was made by a bench of at least five judges. Additionally, a special majority of two-thirds of the bench voted in favor of the motion.
In compliance with the Constitution’s Article 368 requirements, the Act was passed. Additionally, as required by Clause (2) of the aforementioned article, it received the approval of more than half of the State Legislatures. Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and other state legislatures were among those to ratify the change. The modification was not ratified by Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, and Karnataka.
The Janata government passed the Forty-Third Amendment Act of 1977. This was done to undo some distortions that the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 had created. The Act restored the Supreme Court’s and the high court’s jurisdiction to issue writs and conduct judicial reviews. Additionally, it deprived the Parliament of its unique power to enact legislation to address anti-national activity.