Multiple choice

According to the author, the balance between the normal and emergency provisions is palpably destroyed

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The most remarkable achievement in post-constitution India is the exercise of the power of the judicial review by the superior courts. So long as this power is wielded by the courts effectively and fearlessly, democracy will remain ensured in India and, with all its shortcomings, the Constitution will survive. The numerous applications for the constitutional writs before the High Courts and the Supreme Court and their results testify to the establishment in India of ‘limited government’, or, ‘the government of laws, not of men’, as they call it in the United States of America. The Supreme Court has well performed its task of protecting the rights of the individual against the executive, against oppressive legislations and even against the Legislature itself, when it becomes overzealous in asserting its privileges not only against the individual citizens but even against the judges.
At the same time, it should be observed that neither the guarantee of the Fundamental Rights nor its adjunct, — Judicial Review, — could have full play during the first quarter of a century of the working of our Constitution owning to their erosion by Proclamations of Emergency over a substantial period of time. It is true that the Emergency provisions are as much a part of the Constitution of India as any other, and that history has proved the need for such powers to meet extraordinary situations, but, broadly speaking, if the application of the Emergency provisions overshadows the other features of the Constitution, the balance between the ‘normal’ and ‘emergency’ provisions is palpably destroyed. Even, apart from Emergency, there has been an astounding erosion of Fundamental Rights owning to multiple amendments of the Constitution.
The means to prevent any such conflict between competing interests is to process all proposals for constitutional amendments through an expert and objective machinery, which would ensure the progressive adaptation of the Constitution to the Copernican changes in the social, economic and political background.

  1. when the Fundamental Rights and Judicial review would not have its full play

  2. when parliament ceases to be functional

  3. when legislature becomes overzealously assertive about its privileges over individual rights

  4. when the application of emergency provisions overshadows other features of the Constitution

  5. when government declares emergency and tramples upon the Fundamental Rights of citizens

Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

True. This is the correct answer as author wants to settle. He has no quarrel with emergency provisions, except when these powers tend to alter the basic features of the Constitution.