Supreme Court Justice Manmohan called the Kesavananda Bharati judgment India’s key contribution to global rule-of-law discourse. He said, “This basic structure doctrine has ensured the Constitution has survived 75 years, far beyond the usual 20-year lifespan.”
Supreme Court Justice Manmohan described the Kesavananda Bharati judgment as India’s most significant contribution to the global rule-of-law discourse.
He highlighted the basic structure doctrine from this landmark decision as essential for the preservation of the Constitution of India and the independence of the judiciary.
The 1973 ruling established constitutional limits that Parliament cannot overstep, evolving into a safeguard for democratic continuity.
Also Read: Kesavananda Bharati Case Is India’s Constitutional Backbone, Says CJI Surya Kant
He stated,
“The amending power gives liberty to innovate, but not to destroy the basic structure. It has ensured democracy is firmly entrenched and has restrained institutions involved in governance,”
Justice Manmohan emphasized that the judgment solidified unchangeable principles like the separation of powers and the rule of law, which have allowed the Constitution to endure.
He pointed out,
“This basic structure doctrine (evolved in the Kesavananda Bharati judgment) has ensured that the Constitution has survived in this country for 75 years. Normally, if you study the life of a Constitution, the lifespan is about 20 years,”
He also noted that the basic structure doctrine now influences investor confidence.
Stressing that the separation of powers is vital for commercial certainty,he explained,
“When the investor comes, he wants to be assured that the contract entered into will be enforced by an independent judiciary,”
Recalling an experience from his legal practice, Justice Manmohan shared how a foreign solicitor inquired whether senior government officials in India could be approached to sway a verdict in their favor.
He clarified,
“My answer was no. We have a clear separation of powers. No executive can influence the judiciary,”
He connected India’s constitutional evolution to contemporary judicial rulings, such as those in the electoral bonds case, highlighting that courts continue to promote transparency and accountability in political finance.
Justice Manmohan spoke at the inaugural session of the International Bar Association (IBA) India Litigation and ADR Symposium, themed “Will the rule of law and the justice delivery system in India offer a competitive edge over other developing economies? Can uniform laws and justice delivery mechanisms drive us towards a borderless world?”
Attorney General R Venkataramani also addressed the symposium, stating that the rule of law and access to justice operate as mutually reinforcing constitutional commitments.
He emphasized that justice delivery must be meaningful to citizens rather than just an institutional framework, asserting,
“Access to justice is an integral part of the rule of law.”
He further remarked that India’s constitutional framework reflects a convergence of fundamental rights and directive principles, creating what he described as a seamless breadth of constitutional values.
However, he suggested that India should reconsider its adversarial litigation system in favor of a stronger culture of mediation and arbitration.
He noted,
“The more we try to make good an adversarial system, the more problems we have with it. We need courts replicated on new models,”
Former UK Attorney General Lord Peter Goldsmith warned against conflating the rule of law with rule by law.
Justice Philip Jeyaretnam, president of the Singapore International Commercial Court, discussed how international commercial courts are fostering cross-border certainty and legal principles that arbitration alone cannot provide.
The symposium, organized by the India Working Group of the International Bar Association, featured discussions on constitutional protections, reforming the justice system, fostering a culture of mediation, digitizing courts, and exploring comparative dispute resolution frameworks.