Debunking the Myths of Constitutional Law: A Guide for CLAT PG and AILET PG Aspirants

Separating Fact from Fiction in India's Highest Law I still remember my days in finance, where we'd talk about risk management all day. Little did I know that law would be more of the same thing, with a different name – due diligence. Fast forward to law school, and I was in for a surprise. Constitutional Law, in particular, is a minefield of myths and misconceptions. As someone who's been there and done that, I'm here to debunk some of the most common myths and give you a reality check.

The Myth of the "Unamendable" Constitution

One of the most pervasive myths surrounding Constitutional Law is that certain provisions are unamendable. This is often attributed to Article 368, which sets out the procedure for amending the Constitution. However, a closer reading reveals that Article 368 itself can be amended. In Bank Nationalisation Case (1970), the Supreme Court held that Article 368(2) is subject to Article 13, which prohibits the violation of fundamental rights. This effectively means that the Constitution can be amended, but only in accordance with Article 368.

The Myth of the "Supreme" Supreme Court

Another myth is that the Supreme Court has absolute power to interpret the Constitution. While the Court does have significant authority, it is not absolute. In Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), the Supreme Court held that its power to review and declare laws unconstitutional is not unfettered. The Court must exercise its discretion and balance its powers with those of the Legislature and the Executive.

The Myth of the "Unchanging" Constitution

A final myth is that the Constitution is a static document that cannot be changed. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Constitution has been amended numerous times since its adoption in 1950, and it continues to evolve to this day. In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), the Supreme Court held that the Constitution can be amended to accommodate changing social and economic conditions.

The Real-World Relevance of Constitutional Law

So, why does any of this matter? A real-world scenario to think about is the recent controversy surrounding the National Register of Citizens (NRC). If a government decides to implement a law that requires citizens to prove their citizenship, how would you apply the principles of Constitutional Law to determine whether such a law is valid or not? Would you argue that Article 21 (right to life and liberty) is violated, or that Article 14 (equality before the law) is breached? The answer lies in understanding the nuances of Constitutional Law and applying them to the facts of the case. In conclusion, Constitutional Law is not as daunting as it seems. By separating fact from fiction and understanding the myths that surround it, you'll be better equipped to tackle the challenges of CLAT PG and AILET PG. So, go ahead, take a closer look at the Constitution, and see for yourself that it's not as unamendable, supreme, or unchanging as you thought.