Article 34 of the Indian Constitution deals with a specific situation where Fundamental Rights, otherwise guaranteed under Part III, can be restricted. This article comes into play when ‘martial law’ is in force in any area within the territory of India. It grants power to Parliament to indemnify acts done and validate sentences passed during such a period.
This provision acknowledges that during extraordinary circumstances like internal disturbance or rebellion, where martial law might be imposed to restore order, actions might be taken that would ordinarily violate Fundamental Rights or other laws. Article 34 provides a constitutional mechanism for Parliament to protect such actions from legal challenge after the martial law period ends.
Original Text
Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Part, Parliament shall have power to indemnify any person in the service of the Union or of a State or any other person in respect of any act done by him in connection with the maintenance or restoration of order in any area within the territory of India where martial law was in force or validate any sentence passed, punishment inflicted, forfeiture ordered or other act done under martial law in such area.
Detailed Explanation
Article 34 serves as an exception to the Fundamental Rights guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution. It operates specifically in an area where ‘martial law’ is in force. The term ‘martial law’ is not explicitly defined in the Constitution, but it generally refers to the imposition of military rule in exceptional circumstances, such as war, rebellion, insurrection, or serious public disorder, leading to the suspension of ordinary law and the administration of justice by military tribunals or authorities.
The key power conferred by Article 34 is on Parliament. Parliament is empowered to pass an Act of Indemnity after martial law has ceased to operate in an area. This Indemnity Act can protect:
- Persons: Any person in the service of the Union or a State, or even any other person, meaning private individuals acting under military authority or aiding in restoring order.
- Actions: Acts done by these persons in connection with the maintenance or restoration of order in the area where martial law was in force.
- Validation: It can also validate any sentence passed, punishment inflicted, forfeiture ordered, or other act done under martial law in that area. This means that decisions and actions taken by military authorities or others exercising power under martial law, which might not conform to ordinary legal standards, can be given legal validity retrospectively by Parliament.
The phrase “Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Part” explicitly states that this power of Parliament overrides any provision in Part III (Fundamental Rights). This means Parliament can pass an Act of Indemnity that shields individuals and validates actions even if those actions violated Fundamental Rights during the period of martial law.
The purpose of this article is to ensure that those who took necessary steps to restore order during a period of martial law are not subjected to harassment or legal proceedings after the situation normalizes. It recognises the extraordinary nature of martial law and the need for extraordinary measures, while placing the ultimate authority to validate such measures with the democratically elected Parliament.
Detailed Notes
- Relates to restrictions on Fundamental Rights (Part III).
- Applies only when ‘martial law’ is in force in a specific area.
- ‘Martial law’ is not defined in the Constitution.
- Grants power exclusively to Parliament.
- Parliament can pass an Act of Indemnity after martial law has ceased.
- The Indemnity Act can protect:
- Persons in Union/State service.
- Any other person.
- Protection is for acts done to maintain or restore order during martial law.
- Parliament can also validate sentences, punishments, forfeitures, etc., done under martial law.
- This power overrides all other provisions of Part III (Fundamental Rights).
- Purpose is to protect individuals from legal liability for acts done in an extraordinary situation.
- It recognizes the temporary suspension of ordinary law during martial law.
Additional Comments
- Martial law is invoked in extreme situations of civil unrest, rebellion, or invasion where civil administration is unable to function effectively.
- It involves the temporary superseding of ordinary law and the transfer of governmental functions, including judicial powers, to military authorities.
- Article 34 empowers Parliament to regularize actions taken during such an exceptional period, preventing potential abuse of process against those who acted to restore order.
- It is distinct from a Proclamation of National Emergency under Article 352, which does not automatically lead to the imposition of martial law across the country and where civil administration continues.
- While Article 359 allows for the suspension of the right to move courts for enforcement of some Fundamental Rights during an Emergency, Article 34 deals with the validation of acts done during martial law and provides indemnity against consequences.
- The power under Article 34 is a significant check as it requires parliamentary approval for the validation of acts done under martial law, preventing arbitrary actions from being immune without legislative scrutiny.
Summary
Article 34 of the Indian Constitution empowers Parliament to pass an Act of Indemnity for any person acting in connection with the maintenance or restoration of order in an area where martial law was in force. Parliament can indemnify individuals (including state/union personnel and others) for their actions and validate sentences, punishments, or other acts carried out under martial law in that area, notwithstanding the provisions of Fundamental Rights in Part III. This article provides a constitutional basis for Parliament to protect actions taken during extraordinary periods of martial law from subsequent legal challenge.