During the period of National Emergency all the Fundamental Rights and their operation was suspended by the President. Is such action valid? Decide with reasons

Facts of the Case

• A National Emergency was proclaimed under Article 352 of the Constitution due to a threat to the security of India.
• Following this, the President issued an order under Article 359, suspending the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights under Part III of the Constitution.
• Consequently, during the emergency period, the operation of Fundamental Rights stood suspended.
• A challenge has been raised questioning whether all Fundamental Rights can be suspended by the President, and if such suspension is legally valid under the Constitution.

Issues in the Case

1. Whether the President has the power to suspend Fundamental Rights during a National Emergency?
2. Whether the suspension applies to all Fundamental Rights or only to specific rights?
3. Whether such suspension is constitutionally valid and enforceable?

Legal Principles Covered

1. Article 352 – Proclamation of Emergency
   • Allows the President to declare emergency when the security of India is threatened.
2. Article 358 – Suspension of Article 19 Rights
   • When an emergency is declared on grounds of war or external aggression, the rights guaranteed under Article 19 are automatically suspended.
3. Article 359 – Suspension of Enforcement of Fundamental Rights
   • The President may, by order, suspend the right to move a court for enforcement of specified Fundamental Rights during the emergency.
   • However, the rights themselves are not abolished; only the right to enforce them through courts is suspended.
4. 44th Constitutional Amendment, 1978
   • After this amendment:
     • Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21) cannot be suspended, even during emergency.
     • Only specified rights may be suspended.
5. Relevant Case Law
   • ADM Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla (1976)
     • Supreme Court held that during an emergency, a person cannot approach the court even for illegal detention.
     • This judgment was later criticized and overruled.
   • Justice K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
     • Declared that ADM Jabalpur was incorrect.
     • Confirmed that Article 21 cannot be suspended and basic rights to life and dignity remain protected.

Possible Judgment

• The action of suspending all Fundamental Rights is not valid.
• Under the Constitution:
  • Article 19 rights may be suspended automatically in situations of war/external aggression.
  • Other rights may be suspended only regarding enforcement, and only if specifically mentioned in the Presidential Order under Article 359.
  • Article 21 and Article 22(1)-(2) cannot be suspended after the 44th Amendment.

Therefore:

• The suspension of enforcement of certain rights is constitutionally valid, provided it is done following Articles 358 and 359.
• However, suspending all Fundamental Rights including Right to Life and Personal Liberty is unconstitutional.
• The President’s power is limited, and Fundamental Rights, particularly Article 21, remain operative even during National Emergency.

About lawgnan

Explore how the Constitution of India regulates the suspension of Fundamental Rights during a National Emergency under Articles 352, 358, and 359. Understand the limits of Presidential power, the impact of the 44th Constitutional Amendment, and the judicial interpretation that protects the Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21). Visit Lawgnan.in to read in-depth analyses, case law discussions, and constitutional insights on emergency provisions and fundamental rights protection. Stay informed about your constitutional safeguards even in extraordinary times of national crisis.