What make fundamental rights different for Armed forces of India?
The 42nd Amendment to the Constitution of India was passed in 1976 during the Emergency era, when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had declared a state of national emergency on June 26, 1975, and suspended many civil liberties. The amendment was passed on January 22, 1977, just a few months before the eRead more
The 42nd Amendment to the Constitution of India was passed in 1976 during the Emergency era, when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had declared a state of national emergency on June 26, 1975, and suspended many civil liberties. The amendment was passed on January 22, 1977, just a few months before the end of the Emergency.
Importance of the 42nd Amendment:
The 42nd Amendment was significant because it introduced several changes to the Constitution, which were intended to strengthen the government’s authority and weaken the checks and balances on its power. The amendment was seen as a attempt to consolidate the government’s control and ensure its continued dominance over other branches of government.
Changes brought by the 42nd Amendment:
- Amendment to Article 31-C: The amendment deleted Article 31-C, which protected citizens’ rights to property and personal liberty from laws that were violative of fundamental rights. This change allowed the government to pass laws that could potentially violate these rights.
- Amendment to Article 31-D: The amendment added a new clause to Article 31-D, which enabled the government to override court decisions that went against its policies or decisions.
- Amendment to Article 368: The amendment introduced a new clause to Article 368, which allowed Parliament to amend any part of the Constitution, including fundamental rights, without any judicial review.
- Amendment to Article 32: The amendment reduced the scope of judicial review by limiting the Supreme Court’s powers to review constitutional amendments.
- Amendment to Article 13: The amendment deleted Clause (2) of Article 13, which had previously prohibited the government from making laws that were inconsistent with fundamental rights.
- Amendment to Article 143: The amendment gave Parliament the power to make laws on matters related to the Indian Constitution without consulting the President.
Impact of the 42nd Amendment:
The 42nd Amendment has been criticized for its far-reaching implications on Indian democracy. Some of the concerns raised include:
- Erosion of judicial independence: The amendment reduced the scope of judicial review and undermined the independence of the judiciary.
- Weakening of checks and balances: The amendment weakened the system of checks and balances between different branches of government, potentially allowing for abuse of power.
- Expansion of executive power: The amendment gave more power to the executive branch, potentially enabling it to dominate other branches of government.

In India, the fundamental rights for armed forces personnel differ significantly from those enjoyed by civilians due to the unique nature of their duties and the need for discipline and efficiency in the military. The Constitution of India provides these distinctions to maintain the integrity and efRead more
In India, the fundamental rights for armed forces personnel differ significantly from those enjoyed by civilians due to the unique nature of their duties and the need for discipline and efficiency in the military. The Constitution of India provides these distinctions to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of the armed forces.
For instance, Article 33 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Parliament to restrict or abrogate the fundamental rights of members of the armed forces to ensure proper discharge of their duties and maintain discipline. This means that rights such as freedom of speech, association, and assembly can be curtailed. A soldier, unlike a civilian, cannot join a political party or participate in a protest march, as it might compromise military discipline and cohesion.
A practical example of this is the restriction on freedom of speech and expression. Armed forces personnel are prohibited from openly criticizing government policies or actions, which is permissible for civilians. This restriction ensures that the armed forces remain apolitical and focused on national security.
Similarly, the right to form associations or unions is limited for military personnel. This prevents the formation of groups that could disrupt the chain of command and operational effectiveness, essential for the swift and decisive actions required in military operations.
These restrictions highlight the balance between safeguarding individual rights and ensuring the collective security and operational readiness of the nation’s armed forces, showcasing the unique demands placed on those who serve in uniform.
See less