Emerging from a Supreme Court Judgement, the Basic Structure Doctrine marked a significant shift in the balance of power, between legislature and judiciary. Explain. How the evolution of this doctrine also led to tensions between the judiciary and the legislature?

The doctrine emerged from the landmark Supreme Court judgment in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), where the court held that:

• The Constitution has certain basic features that are inviolable and cannot be amended by Parliament.
• The judiciary has the power to review and strike down constitutional amendments that alter the basic structure of the Constitution.
• The power of judicial review is an essential feature of the basic structure, and thus, cannot be taken away even by a constitutional amendment.

This judgment marked a significant shift in the balance of power, as it:

• Established the supremacy of the Constitution over Parliament’s amending powers.
• Asserted the judiciary’s role as the ultimate interpreter and protector of the Constitution.
• Placed a check on the legislative power to amend the Constitution, preventing any potential misuse.

However, the evolution of the Basic Structure Doctrine has also led to tensions between the judiciary and the legislature:

• Critics argue that the doctrine has given the judiciary excessive power, allowing it to encroach upon the legislative domain.
• The lack of a clear definition of what constitutes the “basic structure” has led to concerns about judicial overreach and subjectivity in interpreting the doctrine.
• The doctrine has been a source of conflict between the judiciary and the legislature, with the latter often accusing the former of judicial activism.

Despite these concerns, the Basic Structure Doctrine has been instrumental in protecting the fundamental rights of citizens and preserving the core values of the Constitution. It also has helped in maintaining the system of checks and balances, ensuring that no branch of the government becomes too powerful. The doctrine has also strengthened the role of the judiciary as a guardian of the Constitution and a check on the executive and legislative powers.