Necessity of amending provision in the
Constitution
It is made with a view
to overcome the difficulties which may be encountered in the future in the
working of the constitution.
The nature of amending
"amending process" envisaged by the framers of our constitution can
best be understood by referring the following observation of the late prime
minister pt. Nehru, "while we want this constitution be as solid and permanent
as we can make it, there is no permanence in the constitution. There should be
certain flexibility. If you make anything rigid and permanent you stop the
nation's growth, of a living vital, organic people…………. In any event, we could
not make this constitution so rigid that it cannot be adopted to changing
conditions. When the world is in a period of transition what we may do today
may not be wholly applicable tomorrow" practically every constitution has
some formal provisions for amendment of the constitution. In a rigid
constitution amendment is more elaborate and difficult then enactment of
ordinary legislation. In a flexible constitution, amendment can be effected
rather easily, as easily as enacting an ordinary law.
The former procedure
to amend some foreign federal constitutions as follows:
- U.S.A.: In U.S.A., amendment of the constitution may be
proposed only by congress, with the approval of 2/3 of majority of both
houses (congress and senate), or a convention summoned on an application
from 2/3 of the members of both houses. The proposed amendments must be
ratified by at least ¾ of the total number of the state legislatures or by
conventions in ¾ of the total numbers of the states.
