Die basiese-struktuur-leerstuk : 'n basis vir die toepassing in Suid-Afrika, of 'n skending van die skeiding van magte?
Date
2015-08
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
LitNet
Abstract
Die basiese-struktuur-leerstuk is in 1973 deur die hoogste hof van Indië ontwikkel in ’n poging om die misbruik van grondwetwysigings deur die dominante regerende party te voorkom. Die leerstuk bepaal dat, ten spyte daarvan dat die formele en prosedurele vereistes vir wysiging nagekom is, ’n wysiging ongrondwetlik sal wees indien dit die basiese struktuur van die Grondwet skend, negeer of vervang. Sedertdien het hierdie leerstuk ’n deurslaggewende rol gespeel in die beskerming van Indië se grondwetlike demokrasie en dit vind vandag ook aanwending in verskeie ander jurisdiksies. Of die leerstuk op dieselfde wyse in die Suid-Afrikaanse grondwetlike reg toepassing kan vind, is by geleentheid deur die konstitusionele hof oorweeg, maar geen finale beslissing bestaan in hierdie verband nie. Terwyl skrywers soos Samuel Issacharoff en Sujit Choudhry die oorname van die leerstuk in Suid-Afrika bepleit, is ander, soos Theunis Roux, nie so optimisties oor die moontlikheid van so ’n ontwikkeling nie. Sentraal tot die debat is die vraag of die leerstuk sal inbreuk maak op die skeiding van magte tussen die regsprekende gesag en die wetgewende gesag, aangesien dit aan die hof as ’n niedemokraties verkose instelling die mag gee om wysigings deur die demokraties verkose wetgewer te verwerp.
Hierdie artikel oorweeg die potensiële oorname van die leerstuk in Suid-Afrika met verwysing na die wisselwerking tussen die leerstuk en die skeiding van magte. Die rol van die leerstuk in Indië word ondersoek om te bepaal hoe die hoogste hof aldaar te werk gegaan het om die leerstuk met die skeiding van magte te versoen. Daar word dan regsvergelykend gewys op die tekstuele en kontekstuele verskille wat die oorname van die leerstuk in Suid-Afrika se grondwetlike reg bemoeilik, en meer spesifiek, die wyse waarop die Suid-Afrikaanse model van die skeiding van magte so ’n oorname weerstaan. Voorts sal die akademiese debat tussen Issacharoff en Roux oor die leerstuk krities ondersoek word.
The basic structure doctrine was first introduced in 1973 by the Indian supreme court in an attempt to prohibit the dominant Congress Party from abusing its power to amend the Indian Constitution. The doctrine determines that an amendment is unconstitutional if it infringes, negates or substitutes the basic structure of the Constitution, regardless of whether all the formal and procedural requirements for the amendment are met. In Kesavananda Bharti v Union of India (1973) 4 SCC 225 (India)the supreme court found that the word “amendment” does not entail the destruction of the fundamental characteristics of the Constitution, as they form part of an unamendable basic structure. The court also questioned whether amendments necessarily reflect the wishes of the electorate, as it is relatively easy to amend the Indian Constitution, leaving it vulnerable to abuse by a dominant party. What constitutes the “basic structure” of the Constitution became clear over time, as the doctrine was used in subsequent cases. However, in the Kesavananda case the court had already identified the power of judicial review, democracy, federalism, the separation of powers, the secular character of the state and certain fundamental rights such as freedom and equality as part of the basic structure doctrine.
The basic structure doctrine was first introduced in 1973 by the Indian supreme court in an attempt to prohibit the dominant Congress Party from abusing its power to amend the Indian Constitution. The doctrine determines that an amendment is unconstitutional if it infringes, negates or substitutes the basic structure of the Constitution, regardless of whether all the formal and procedural requirements for the amendment are met. In Kesavananda Bharti v Union of India (1973) 4 SCC 225 (India)the supreme court found that the word “amendment” does not entail the destruction of the fundamental characteristics of the Constitution, as they form part of an unamendable basic structure. The court also questioned whether amendments necessarily reflect the wishes of the electorate, as it is relatively easy to amend the Indian Constitution, leaving it vulnerable to abuse by a dominant party. What constitutes the “basic structure” of the Constitution became clear over time, as the doctrine was used in subsequent cases. However, in the Kesavananda case the court had already identified the power of judicial review, democracy, federalism, the separation of powers, the secular character of the state and certain fundamental rights such as freedom and equality as part of the basic structure doctrine.
Description
CITATION: Van Schalkwyk, C. 2015. Die basiese-struktuur-leerstuk : 'n basis vir die toepassing in Suid-Afrika, of 'n skending van die skeiding van magte? LitNet Akademies, 12(2):347-363.
The original publication is available at http://www.litnet.co.za
The original publication is available at http://www.litnet.co.za
Keywords
Judicial independence -- South Africa, Constitutional law -- South Africa, Constitutional court -- South Africa, Separation of powers -- South Africa, South Africa -- Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, Law reports, digests, etc. -- India
Citation
Van Schalkwyk, C. 2015. Die basiese-struktuur-leerstuk : 'n basis vir die toepassing in Suid-Afrika, of 'n skending van die skeiding van magte? LitNet Akademies, 12(2):347-363.