Article 359A

Article 359A was a special and temporary constitutional provision introduced to address the exceptional law and order situation in the State of Punjab during the late 1980s. It was inserted by the Constitution (Fifty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1988, to empower the Union Government with additional emergency powers in response to widespread internal disturbances and insurgency in the region. The article, however, was later repealed by the Constitution (Sixty-third Amendment) Act, 1989.

Background and Context

During the 1980s, Punjab experienced severe internal unrest marked by insurgent activities, communal tensions, and political instability. The situation posed a grave threat to public order and the integrity of India. In this backdrop, Article 359A was enacted as part of the Fifty-ninth Amendment to strengthen the constitutional framework for dealing with emergencies specific to Punjab.
The central government considered that the existing provisions of Part XVIII of the Constitution, which dealt with emergency powers, were insufficient to address the nature of the crisis in Punjab. Consequently, Article 359A was introduced to modify certain provisions related to the proclamation and operation of emergencies, particularly Articles 352, 358, and 359, within the state.

Modifications to Article 352: Proclamation of Emergency

Under the general constitutional framework, Article 352 empowers the President to declare a National Emergency when the security of India or any part thereof is threatened by war, external aggression, or armed rebellion.
Article 359A modified this provision for Punjab by extending the grounds of emergency to include “internal disturbance” as a valid reason for declaring an Emergency in the state. This expansion enabled the central government to proclaim a National Emergency even when the threat arose from internal law and order situations rather than external or armed aggression.
Additionally, the Explanation to Article 352 was amended to explicitly mention internal disturbance within the scope of armed rebellion in the context of Punjab. This provided a constitutional justification for the invocation of emergency powers to counter domestic unrest.

Modifications to Article 358: Suspension of Article 19

Ordinarily, Article 358 provides for the suspension of the freedoms guaranteed under Article 19 during a National Emergency proclaimed on grounds of war or external aggression. Article 359A extended this suspension to include emergencies declared on the basis of armed rebellion or internal disturbance in Punjab.
This meant that, for the duration of such an Emergency, the citizens of Punjab could not claim the protection of Article 19, and the government was not bound by its provisions when enacting laws or executing administrative measures related to the Emergency.

Modifications to Article 359: Suspension of Enforcement of Fundamental Rights

Article 359A also altered the operation of Article 359, which allows the President to suspend the right to move courts for enforcement of certain Fundamental Rights during an Emergency. Under normal circumstances, the rights under Articles 20 and 21 remain safeguarded to protect basic human freedoms.
However, under Article 359A, during an Emergency in Punjab, the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 was also suspended. Only Article 20, which protects individuals from retroactive penal laws and double jeopardy, continued to remain in force. This extraordinary suspension marked a rare constitutional deviation, allowing the State to act without the constraint of Article 21 in the declared area.

Repeal of Article 359A

Article 359A was short-lived. It was repealed by the Constitution (Sixty-third Amendment) Act, 1989, which came into effect on 6 January 1990. The repeal was part of a broader constitutional and political effort to restore normalcy and democratic rights in Punjab following the gradual stabilisation of the region.
With the repeal, all special emergency provisions specific to Punjab ceased to exist, reinstating the standard constitutional framework for emergencies as applicable throughout India.

Significance and Purpose

The introduction of Article 359A reflected the extraordinary measures undertaken by the Indian government to combat terrorism and separatist movements in Punjab during the 1980s. Its main objectives included:

• Providing the Union with enhanced powers to deal with internal threats to national security.
• Allowing the suspension of judicial remedies and certain Fundamental Rights to facilitate administrative and military operations.
• Ensuring the protection of national integrity amid severe internal disorder.

However, the sweeping nature of these powers—especially the suspension of Article 21—generated concerns regarding civil liberties and the potential for human rights violations.

Judicial and Constitutional Perspective

There were no major Supreme Court judgements directly interpreting Article 359A due to its brief existence and limited application. Nevertheless, the general constitutional doctrines governing emergency powers, as laid down in landmark cases, remain relevant:

• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): The Supreme Court held that Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution, including the protection of fundamental rights.
• Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): The Court reaffirmed that even during emergencies, the balance between state authority and individual freedoms must be maintained.

These principles implied that any provision undermining essential rights, such as the right to life and liberty, must be viewed with caution, even in times of national crisis.

Contextual Relationship with Other Emergency Provisions

Article 359A functioned as a temporary extension of the emergency framework provided under the following articles:

• Article 352: Allowed proclamation of emergency on grounds of war, external aggression, or armed rebellion (temporarily expanded for Punjab to include internal disturbance).
• Article 358: Permitted suspension of Article 19 during emergencies (extended for Punjab to include internal disturbances).
• Article 359: Allowed suspension of judicial enforcement of Fundamental Rights (modified in Punjab to include suspension of Article 21).

These modifications collectively gave the central government unprecedented constitutional authority to restore order in the state.

Historical Context and Political Background

The enactment of Article 359A must be understood within the turbulent political and social context of Punjab in the 1980s. The state was experiencing widespread insurgency, leading to the imposition of President’s Rule and repeated use of emergency provisions. The situation culminated in the Fifty-ninth Amendment, which sought to provide the Union with constitutional backing to take strong measures to preserve national security and territorial integrity.
While it helped strengthen the State’s hand in tackling militancy, the provision was controversial for its potential to undermine fundamental human rights and judicial safeguards. The subsequent repeal of Article 359A in 1989 symbolised a constitutional return to normalcy and reaffirmed the nation’s commitment to the protection of individual freedoms even in times of internal strife.