Right to Property, Above All

Right to Property, Above All?
Nireekshak THOUGH the Constitution had been amended 23 times already, the 24th amendment that has just been enacted as well as the 25th and 26th ones that arc pending have together caused more editorial hearts to ache for the future of the 'rule of law' than ever before. However, this simulated or genuine concern for future generations has been well-nigh smothered by the general welcome with which the Press as a whole greeted the constitutional exercise. Why the 24th amendment alone should cause such heartburn, when Parliament may be thought to have already established both its competence and the need occasionally to bring up-to-date the wisdom of the "founding fathers", is not difficult to see. The 24th amendment, which is designed to reverse the effect of the Supreme Court judgment in the Golaknath casti and to restore to Parliament its right to amend any part of the Constitution including the Fundamental Rights, is rightly seen only as a curtain raiser to the two other amendments yet to follow. The latter two seek to make inroads into the citizen's right to property which the Supreme Court has so far held to be fundamental.