PREAMBLE AS A TOOL FOR CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Keywords:
Interpretative Preamble, Substantive Preamble, Justice, Liberty and republic.Abstract
As Said by Coke the Preamble is an excellent means to understand the statute as it opens the doors to understand the mind-set of the makers of the constitution. It plays a great role in constitutional adjudication and design. This study is mainly going to analyse the way of looking at preambles. It is also going to comparatively analyse how the Preamble is being used both in the United States of America and India. It is going to analyse how the Courts in the United States of America have lagged behind in giving the Preamble the role it deserves but India have gone ahead and recognized Preamble as a part of the Basic Structure of the constitution. It is also going to discuss the legal power of preambles where it is going to comparatively analyse the legal force given to preambles in India, the United States of America, Nepal, France, and Germany etc... It is also going to discuss the Consolidative power which the Preamble has. The paper also envisages the idea that Preamble be made a part of the constitution and be given force and also play an active role in adjudication of Constitutional disputes and have a final say in adjudication if there is obscurity in Constitutional provisions. It also asks for better and advanced study in this subject in law schools so that students get an idea of the ideals and values on which our preamble is based.
References
1. Brutus, the Complete Anti -Federalist (1st Edn. Storing 1981) 417 – 421.
2. The Japanese Preamble i s called “Preface”.
3. Hans Kelsen, the Preamble of the Charter—a Critical Analysis, (1946), 8(2) J. POL. 134.
4. International Constitution law Countries, <http://www.servat.unibe. ch/icl/> accessed May 14, 2018.
5. A. V. Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the law of the Constitution (8th Edn 1915) 22.
6. See the preamble of Brazil ( We, the representatives of the Brazilian People) and Armenia (t he Armenian People, Recognizing as a basis the fundamental principles of Armenian statehood).
7. See the Preamble of South Africa (We, the people of South Africa , Recognise the injustices of our past).
8. The Greek preamble states: “In the name of the Holy and Consubstantial and Indivisible Trinity, the Fifth Constitutional Assembly of Greece votes.”
9. The Irish preamble also n otes: “We, the people of Ireland, humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial.”
10. Max Ferrand, the Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 (James H Hutson Vol. II, 1937) 177.
11. Robert J. Peaslee, Our National Constitution: The Preamble, (1929), 9 B.U. L. REV. 2.
12. Max Ferrand, Supplement to Max Ferrand’s Records of Federal Convention of 1787 (James H. Hutson Vol. II, 1937) 183.
13. Edmund Rudolph, American Charters, Constitution and Organic LAWS: 1492-1908 (F. Thorpe 1st Edn, 1909) 3812.
14. Max Ferrand, the Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 (James H Hutson Vol. II, 1937) 193.
15. Morris D. Forkosch, Who Are the “People” in the Preamble to the Constitution?(1968),19 C ASE . W. RES. L. REV. 644.
16. Milton Handler, B rian Leiter& Carole E. Handler, A Reconsideration of the Relevance and Materiality of the Preamble in Constitutional Interpretation,(1991), 12 C ARDOZO L. REV. 117, 120–121.
17. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 13–14 (1905).
18. Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (2d ed. 1851)462. JCLJ (2020) 91–100 © Law Journals 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 99
19. Chisholm v. Georgia U.S. (2 DalI.) 419 (1793).
20. Raymond Marcin, ‘Posterity’ in the Preamble and a Positivist Pro- Position,(1993),38 J. J URIS 273, 281–288.
21. Ric M. Axler, the Power of the Preamble and the Ninth Amendment: the Restoration of the People's Unenumerated Rights, (2000), 24 SETON . HALL LEGIS . J. 431, 435 – 437.
22. Joseph; Bennett Story, Edmund Hatch. Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States: With a Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the Colonies and States, before the Adoption of the Constitution, (1858) 336.
23. Taylor, New Views on the Constitution of the United States, (1823) 171-77.
24. Max Ferrand, Supplement to Max Ferrand’s Records of Federal Convention of 1787 (James H. Hutson Vol. II, 1937) 313.
25. Dan Himmelfarb, the Preamble in Constitutional Interpretation, (1991),2 Seton Hall Const. L.J. 127.
26. United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990).
27. Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393, 404, 410–411 (1857).
28. Employees v. Missouri Public Health Department, 411 U.S. 279, 322 –323 (1973).
29. Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists, 476 U.S. 747 (1986).
30. Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 377–378 (1901).
31. Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243 (1833).
32. Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. (2 DalI.) 419 (1793).
33. Mahon v. Justice, 127 U.S. 700, 716 (1888).
34. Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 37 U.S. (12 Pet.) 657 (1838).
35. Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. (12 Wall.) 418 (1871).
36. Selective Service v. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group, 468 U.S. 841 (1984).
37. Kennedy v. Mendoza -Martinez, 372 U.S. 144 (1963).
38. EEOC v. Wyoming, 460 U.S. 226 (1983).
39. Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 2 54 (1970).
40. Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution goes wrong (1st Edn. Oxford University Press2006) 13.
41. Edward Coke, Institutes of the Laws of England (1st Edn. Society of Stationers 1628) 79.
42. Parliament of India, Accessed on Dec. 12, 2017.
43. R.C. Lahoti, Preamble: The Spirit and Backbone of the Constitution of India (1st Edn. Eastern Book Company 2004) 262.
44. Aparjita Baruah, Preamble of the Constitution of India : An Insight and Comparison with other statutes (1st Edn. Deep and Deep Publications 2007) 224.
45. Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms, AIR 2002 SC 2112.
46. Xavier’s College v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1974 SC 1389.
47. Excel Wear v. Union of India, A IR 1979 SC 25.
48. D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, AIR 1983 SC 130.
49. K.C. Marakandan, The Preamble: Key to the Mind of the makers of the Indian Constitution (1984) 98.
50. Kesavanada Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225.
51. Re Berubari Union, AIR 1960 SC 845.
52. Kesavanada Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225. JCLJ (2020) 91–100 © Law Journals 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 100
53. I.C. GolakNath v. State of Punjab, AIR 1967 SC 1643.
54. Kashi Prasad v. State of U.P., AIR 1950 All 732.
55. William Blackstone, Commentaries on the laws of England (Cla rendon Press 1765) 58.
56. Anne Winckel, the Contextual Role of a Preamble in Statutory Interpretation, (1999), 23 M ELBOURNE L. R EV. 184.
57. Lourens M. D. Plessis, the Evolution of Constitutionalism and the Emergence of a Constitutional Jurisprudence in South Africa: An Evaluation of the South African Constitutional Court's Approach to Constitutional Interpretation, (1999), 62 S ASK. L. REV. 299, 314–315, 321–322.
58. Texas, < http://www.utexas.edu/law/ academics/centers/transnational/work_ new/german/case.php?id=589> Accessed on May 13, 2018).
59. Michel Troper, Judicial Review and International Law, (2003),4 SAN DIEGO INT’L L.J. 39, 50–53.
60. Constitutional Council, < http://www. conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/197 1/7144dc.htm.>Accessed on May 13, 2017).
61. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan, (1997) 11 SCC 123.
62. Article 116(1), Constitution of Nepal , 2015.
63. Hans Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State (2nd E dn. Cambridge University Press 1946) 261.
64. Dieter Grimm, Integration by Constitution, (2005), 3(2) I NT’L J. CON. L. 193, 199.
65. Mark McKenna, Amelia Simpson and George Williams, First Words: The Preamble to the Australian Constitution, (2001), 24 U.N.S.W.L.J. 382. Cite this Article Prasad Hegde . Constitutional Interpretation: A Comparative Analysis. Journal of Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence. 2020; 3(1): 91–100p.
