Introduction
Emergencies reveal the true strength of a constitutional democracy, and India’s Constitution provides a detailed framework to manage such periods. Article 359 stands at the centre of this emergency mechanism. It allows the President to suspend the enforcement of certain fundamental rights when the nation faces a severe threat. This does not mean the rights themselves vanish; instead, citizens temporarily lose the ability to approach courts for their enforcement. The purpose of Article 359 is to ensure that the government can respond swiftly to war, external aggression, or armed rebellion without being held back by litigation during a crisis. At the same time, past misuse has led to strong safeguards that protect individual liberty. Understanding this article helps readers appreciate how the Constitution balances national security with personal freedoms.
Article 359: Meaning, Scope, and Constitutional Position
Understanding the Text of Article 359
Article 359 empowers the President of India to issue an order suspending the right of individuals to move any court for the enforcement of specified fundamental rights during a proclaimed National Emergency. The suspension does not occur automatically; it begins only when the President issues a formal order clearly mentioning the rights that will remain unenforceable for the duration of the emergency. The fundamental rights themselves continue to exist but cannot be invoked through a writ petition in any court until the order is revoked.
This mechanism supports the government during extraordinary situations where quick decisions are essential. At the same time, it ensures that once the emergency ends, the protection of fundamental rights is fully restored. Article 359 is therefore a temporary restriction, crafted to maintain constitutional order while addressing urgent national threats.
How Article 359 Operates During an Emergency
When a National Emergency is in force under Article 352 and the President issues an order under Article 359, citizens lose the immediate ability to approach courts for remedies such as habeas corpus or mandamus in relation to the suspended rights. Courts also cannot entertain new petitions involving those rights for the duration of the order.
However, this does not give the State absolute power. Government actions taken during this period can be challenged once the emergency and the suspension order come to an end. This ensures accountability while giving the government the temporary flexibility it needs in critical moments. The Constitution maintains a delicate balance: it does not halt the functioning of democracy but adapts its processes to handle emergencies.
Effect of the 44th Constitutional Amendment on Article 359
The abuse of emergency powers during the 1975–1977 period led to a major reconsideration of Articles 352 to 359. The 44th Constitutional Amendment brought historic changes to strengthen civil liberties. One of the most important changes involved Article 359. The amendment made it clear that the enforcement of Articles 20 and 21 can never be suspended. This safeguard ensures that the right to life, personal liberty, and protection against arbitrary punishment remain enforceable even during the harshest emergency.
The amendment also reinforced post-emergency judicial review. Courts now consistently hold that actions taken under the cover of suspended rights cannot escape scrutiny once normal constitutional conditions return. These safeguards significantly transform the scope of Article 359, ensuring that national security measures never permanently overshadow fundamental human rights.
Judicial Interpretation and Landmark Judgments
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976)
This case became a symbol of the dangers of unchecked emergency powers. During the 1975 Emergency, the Supreme Court held that citizens could not seek judicial remedy even for unlawful detention because the enforcement of their rights was suspended. The judgment was widely criticised for weakening the right to liberty. The 44th Amendment and subsequent cases effectively overturned this position, affirming that Article 21 remains enforceable at all times.
Makhan Singh v. State of Punjab (1964)
In this landmark case, the Supreme Court clarified that Article 359 suspends only the remedy, not the fundamental right itself. The Court also held that individuals could still challenge government actions on grounds unrelated to the suspended rights. This interpretation remains important even today, as it prevents Article 359 from becoming a tool for unnecessary executive overreach.
Relevance of Article 359 in the Present Constitutional Framework
India has not witnessed a National Emergency since 1977, yet Article 359 continues to hold relevance. It remains a constitutional instrument designed for exceptional circumstances. Whenever national security is gravely threatened, the government can rely on this provision for temporary flexibility. At the same time, the reforms introduced after the 1975 experience ensure that civil liberties cannot be ignored.
Today, Article 359 functions more as a protective measure rather than an active tool. It stands ready for use but also carries strong safeguards that prevent the concentration of power. In that sense, it reflects the modern democratic commitment of the Indian Constitution. The provision exists to safeguard the nation without damaging the spirit of constitutionalism.
Illustrative Example for Better Understanding
Consider a scenario in which a National Emergency is declared because of war. To control the situation, the government may need to take quick action without delays caused by litigation. If the President issues an order under Article 359 suspending the enforcement of Article 22 procedures, individuals temporarily cannot challenge detentions based on technical procedural violations. However, their right to life and liberty under Article 21 remains enforceable. This example shows how Article 359 ensures both national security and constitutional fairness.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Article 359 permanently remove fundamental rights?
No. Article 359 only suspends the ability to enforce certain rights before courts for a temporary period. After the emergency and the suspension order end, the full enforceability of rights returns.
Can Article 21 be suspended during an emergency?
No. After the 44th Constitutional Amendment, Article 21 remains enforceable even during emergencies. This ensures that no individual can be denied life or personal liberty without valid procedure.
How is Article 359 different from Article 358?
Article 358 suspends Article 19 automatically during emergencies involving war or external aggression, while Article 359 requires a separate Presidential order and applies to rights other than Articles 20 and 21.
Can courts review emergency actions later?
Yes. Courts can examine government actions taken during the suspension once the emergency ends. This ensures that temporary emergency powers do not become permanent.
Is Article 359 applicable during a State Emergency?
No. Article 359 applies only during a National Emergency declared under Article 352.
Conclusion
Article 359 plays a vital role in India’s emergency structure. It allows the government to take quick action when the country faces extreme threats, yet it also preserves constitutional safeguards. The changes introduced through the 44th Amendment ensure that essential rights such as life and liberty remain protected. Over the years, Article 359 has moved from being a controversial emergency tool to a balanced constitutional safeguard. It remains a reminder that even in moments of crisis, India upholds democratic values and constitutional morality. For a deeper understanding of emergency provisions or personalised legal guidance, consulting ApniLaw’s legal experts can help you navigate these complex constitutional concepts with clarity.
