The Constitution and the Rule of Law
This domain tests the 1978 Constitution as supreme law: its sovereignty articles, entrenched clauses, amendment procedure, and rule-of-law principles applied to short 'is this lawful?' scenarios.
Supremacy and sovereignty
- Article 1 describes the State; Article 3 vests sovereignty in the People and declares it inalienable.
- Article 4 divides the exercise of sovereignty among the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.
- Legislation inconsistent with the Constitution is void to the extent of the inconsistency.
Amendment and review
- Ordinary constitutional amendments need a two-thirds majority in Parliament.
- Article 83 entrenches Articles 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11: changing these needs a two-thirds majority and approval at a referendum.
- Article 120 gives the Supreme Court sole power to determine whether a Bill is constitutional; Article 121 requires a challenge to be filed within one week of the Bill appearing on the Order Paper.
Rule of law
- Article 13 guarantees freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention, a fair trial, and protection from retrospective criminal laws (Article 13(6)).
- Article 12 requires equality before the law and forbids discrimination on grounds such as race, religion, language, caste, sex or political opinion.
Worked example. A Bill proposes to amend Article 10 (freedom of conscience). A student group asks whether a two-thirds majority alone is enough. Reasoning: Article 10 appears in the Article 83 list, so the amendment needs a two-thirds majority plus success at a referendum; if its constitutionality is contested, the Supreme Court must determine it within the Article 121 window before enactment.
Traps that cost marks
- Confusing a simple majority (ordinary law) with a two-thirds majority (constitutional amendment).
- Saying the Constitution cannot be amended at all.
- Forgetting that Article 9 on Buddhism being foremost is itself entrenched.
- Ignoring the one-week deadline for pre-enactment review.