They can keep amending it but to change it would be perceived as an attack on Legacy of Ambedkar, SC/STs are one of their biggest voting bloc, nothing will change it except something like this.
This is a very fair question after how the IPC and the Evidence Act were bulldozed. The current drafters in the Law Ministry cannot draft a single cogent section together, Companies Act, 2013 is Exhibit A.
Bhai woh statutory law hai. It can be changed. Here, we are talking about Constitutional Amendment. There is a huge difference.
Constitutional amendments (which do not change the federal nature of polity) need a Special majority from both houses + no joint sitting is allowed. So, you need a Special majority in both houses which is very difficult to get in Rajya Sabha (even Rajiv Gandhi did not have it). So, a lot of manoeuvring and ED's dastak at regional party's door is needed.
Constitutional amendments (which change the federal nature of polity), like GST bill, needs further ratification from 16 states by a simple majority. There too there is a loophole. There is no time limit as to when they can ratify. So, it becomes more difficult and further onboarding of regional satraps is needed.
Statutory laws can be amended on a whim. A simple majority is required and joint sitting is also allowed. So, even if I am against you, I can walk out in protest, and reduce the numbers and help you (which the JDU does). This is not possible in a Constitutional amendment.
BJP cannot change the Basic Structure of the Constitution, but, they will change the Constitution "without changing the Constitution."
1. The basic structure doctrine has around 50 items as of today. You can Wikipedia it. Most of them are fairly vague, like - independence of the judiciary, parliamentary form of govt. etc.
- Have they defined independence? Who says If NJAC comes the independence will most likely reduce? Are there research papers that show that when the political executive appoints judges their independence reduce? USA does that.
- Who defines the parliamentary form of govt? France has a mix of Presidential & parliamentary form of govt. So, something like that can happen in India too.
Point is, like the Article 370 removal where the Legislative assembly was termed as Constituent assembly and since Legislative assembly was disbanded ultimately the parliament had the powers, similar wordplay can be done to change things without changing things.
2. Basic structure doctrine itself is evolving. Meaning tomorrow one can add - using social media sites without permission of authorities as a Fundamental right and put it in the basic structure. So, who is to say a pro right judge bench would not add a pro BJP ideal in the Basic Structure?
3. It serves the BJP to carry the Dr. Ambedkar image. Like the Dual Govt. of Bengal after the battle of Plassey, BJP will like to keep the image of Dr. Ambedkar so that it shields them from all issues. So, they would try to co-opt him. Remember the Sarkari app for UPI is not UPI, it is BHIM (Bharat interface for money).
So, all in all, BJP will slowly change the Constitution, without changing the Constitution. When the main power centre of the state is doing Puja in Public, why cry when "secular" is written in some book which even the lawyers find difficult to understand, and no one in 1.4 Billion actually reads (except dumb UPSC CSE aspirants jinka jeena haraam kar deti hai UPSC by asking question khod khod ke)
Search for basic structure doctrine items. Tell me if I am wrong about the items listed. Or buy Laxmikanth. It is given. Argument ko argument se kaatiye. Appendix appendix mat kheliye.
I am tired of our half imported and rather confused constitution. India deserves a better one. Basic Structure is an archaic and status quoist doctrine that will hold India back with pointless litigation. We should formulate dynamic structures / doctrines and build them into a new constitution, which can keep pace with a new India, Bharat. Litmus test for a better constitution - a Supreme Court that's hearing only serious, non frivolous matters that put forth only real questions of law (and not acting like an appeals court). Better quality lawyers coming forth to practice at the SC (apart from its long established oligarchs) is another indicator
Why this condescending view towards the BJP? 2014, BJP and allies got 37%+ of the votes in a first past the post system.
If they are doing something wrong and they are not in tune with people's aspirations, people will throw them out. If not, then they are doing things which help them connect with their core voters.
And finally, if you think the voters are wrong, I agree. The voters were wrong to give Lalu Yadav 15y unbridled power in Bihar, which literally made the word Bihari equivalent to illiterate crass person. The voters were wrong to vote our Vajpayee ji's govt. So, I agree, democracy is dumb.
But, let us not question the wisdom of voters and the brain of a India winning machine, only when the results are against you. Blind hate towards people less sophisticated than you will lead you nowhere.
I am a voter and I am entitled to criticise the actions of the party in power and why I think such actions are bad for the country. Why is it that RW supporters always refer to any criticism as blind hate? As for questioning the wisdom of the voters, any educated person should do that, considering that votes in India are still won on factors like caste, religion and muscle power, as compared to the parties' stance on matters like employment, education, health and environment.
Would love to know which party in India wins election on the basis of employment, education, health and environment.
-AAP - give freebie, win election.
-INC - hold caste census, hold riots, get SC+ Muslim + Upper caste votes and win elections.
-BJP - get hindutva + nationalism + general caste + OBC votes in name of PM Modi and win elections.
-CPI and TMC - Do not allow anyone to contest against you. Maime, kill anyone who stands in front and win.
-DMK, AIADMK - give freebies + criticise North India, Hindi. Get OBC votes.
All parties in India win election on these identity markers only. I would give CPI(M) credit here, that they remain true to their ideology at all costs (do ask the CPI(M) how many OBC, SC,ST are there in their Politburo).
As far as your questions as a voter is concerned, for winning India, you need 37% of the polled votes. For เคชเฅเคฐเคเคเคก bahumat, as in Rajiv Gandhi level, you need 48% votes. So, all wannabe Karan Thapars should ask - Does the ruling party (BJP or INC) really care for my question or want my vote?
Theoretically by applying Keshavanand, They cannot... but realistically, they can.. They have every kind of majority & SCI โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ... Imagine the bench of Chandru, Sanju, Surya Bhai, Kholi, Belu Tirvedi, Vanarsimha, Bindal, Dattu, Bhatti, PK Pisra, SC Sarma, Hardiwala, amanulla, augustine, Metha... This bench will overrule every keshvanand, waman rao, coello or maneka gandhi... One or 2 of them will write some spicy dissent for the record but actually only 8 judges are needed to overrule Keshavanand & current SCI has more than 8 judges โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ... so technically BJP can change everything from CoI successfully...
Opposition at this point doesn't exist to successfully defeat any laws.
Can BJP just bring a new constitution 'Bharatiya Constitution 2024'?
After paraphrasing the old one and adding some additional clauses just like criminal law amendment can they make a new constitution?
In the US constitutional amendment requires state approval. India nothing like that is required. Only a Parliamentary approval is needed.
This is a hypothetical question. Hope they don't change it.
They can keep amending it but to change it would be perceived as an attack on Legacy of Ambedkar, SC/STs are one of their biggest voting bloc, nothing will change it except something like this.
Constitutional amendments (which do not change the federal nature of polity) need a Special majority from both houses + no joint sitting is allowed. So, you need a Special majority in both houses which is very difficult to get in Rajya Sabha (even Rajiv Gandhi did not have it). So, a lot of manoeuvring and ED's dastak at regional party's door is needed.
Constitutional amendments (which change the federal nature of polity), like GST bill, needs further ratification from 16 states by a simple majority. There too there is a loophole. There is no time limit as to when they can ratify. So, it becomes more difficult and further onboarding of regional satraps is needed.
Statutory laws can be amended on a whim. A simple majority is required and joint sitting is also allowed. So, even if I am against you, I can walk out in protest, and reduce the numbers and help you (which the JDU does). This is not possible in a Constitutional amendment.
1. The basic structure doctrine has around 50 items as of today. You can Wikipedia it. Most of them are fairly vague, like - independence of the judiciary, parliamentary form of govt. etc.
- Have they defined independence? Who says If NJAC comes the independence will most likely reduce? Are there research papers that show that when the political executive appoints judges their independence reduce? USA does that.
- Who defines the parliamentary form of govt? France has a mix of Presidential & parliamentary form of govt. So, something like that can happen in India too.
Point is, like the Article 370 removal where the Legislative assembly was termed as Constituent assembly and since Legislative assembly was disbanded ultimately the parliament had the powers, similar wordplay can be done to change things without changing things.
2. Basic structure doctrine itself is evolving. Meaning tomorrow one can add - using social media sites without permission of authorities as a Fundamental right and put it in the basic structure. So, who is to say a pro right judge bench would not add a pro BJP ideal in the Basic Structure?
3. It serves the BJP to carry the Dr. Ambedkar image. Like the Dual Govt. of Bengal after the battle of Plassey, BJP will like to keep the image of Dr. Ambedkar so that it shields them from all issues. So, they would try to co-opt him. Remember the Sarkari app for UPI is not UPI, it is BHIM (Bharat interface for money).
So, all in all, BJP will slowly change the Constitution, without changing the Constitution. When the main power centre of the state is doing Puja in Public, why cry when "secular" is written in some book which even the lawyers find difficult to understand, and no one in 1.4 Billion actually reads (except dumb UPSC CSE aspirants jinka jeena haraam kar deti hai UPSC by asking question khod khod ke)
If they are doing something wrong and they are not in tune with people's aspirations, people will throw them out. If not, then they are doing things which help them connect with their core voters.
And finally, if you think the voters are wrong, I agree. The voters were wrong to give Lalu Yadav 15y unbridled power in Bihar, which literally made the word Bihari equivalent to illiterate crass person. The voters were wrong to vote our Vajpayee ji's govt. So, I agree, democracy is dumb.
But, let us not question the wisdom of voters and the brain of a India winning machine, only when the results are against you. Blind hate towards people less sophisticated than you will lead you nowhere.
-AAP - give freebie, win election.
-INC - hold caste census, hold riots, get SC+ Muslim + Upper caste votes and win elections.
-BJP - get hindutva + nationalism + general caste + OBC votes in name of PM Modi and win elections.
-CPI and TMC - Do not allow anyone to contest against you. Maime, kill anyone who stands in front and win.
-DMK, AIADMK - give freebies + criticise North India, Hindi. Get OBC votes.
All parties in India win election on these identity markers only. I would give CPI(M) credit here, that they remain true to their ideology at all costs (do ask the CPI(M) how many OBC, SC,ST are there in their Politburo).
As far as your questions as a voter is concerned, for winning India, you need 37% of the polled votes. For เคชเฅเคฐเคเคเคก bahumat, as in Rajiv Gandhi level, you need 48% votes. So, all wannabe Karan Thapars should ask - Does the ruling party (BJP or INC) really care for my question or want my vote?
Imagine the bench of Chandru, Sanju, Surya Bhai, Kholi, Belu Tirvedi, Vanarsimha, Bindal, Dattu, Bhatti, PK Pisra, SC Sarma, Hardiwala, amanulla, augustine, Metha... This bench will overrule every keshvanand, waman rao, coello or maneka gandhi... One or 2 of them will write some spicy dissent for the record but actually only 8 judges are needed to overrule Keshavanand & current SCI has more than 8 judges โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ โฎโฎโฎ...
so technically BJP can change everything from CoI successfully...