PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 339
we are in the midst of a paradox; we have Fundamental Rights, we have limitations imposed upon them, and yet the Supreme Court and the High Courts say. “You shall not have any further limitations upon the Fundamental Rights.”
Now comes the question ; how does this result come to be ? And here I come to the canons of interpretation which have been adopted in the United States and by the Supreme Court and High Courts in our country. As hon. Members who are familiar with the growth of the Constitution of the United States will know, although the Constitution of the United States is a bundle of bare bones, the United States Supreme Court has clothed it with flesh and muscle so that it has got the firmness of body and agillity which a human being requires. How has this happened ? This has happened because the U.S. Supreme Court, although it was the first Court in the world which was called upon to reconcile the Fundamental Rights of the citizen with the interests of the State, after a great deal of pioneering work came upon two fixed principles of the Constitution. One is that every State possesses what is called in the United States “police power”, a doctrine which means that the State has a right to protect itself whether the Constitution gives such a right expressly or not. The “police power” is an inherent thing just as our Courts have inherent powers, in certain circumstances, to do justice. It is as a result of this doctrine of “police power” that the United. States Supreme Court has been able to evolve certain limitations upon the Fundamental Rights of the United States citizens. The second doctrine which the United States Supreme Court developed and which it applied for purposes of interpreting the Constitution is known as the doctrine of “implied powers”. According to the decisions of the Supreme Court if any particular authority has been given a certain power, then it must be presumed that it has got other powers to fulfil that power and if those powers are not given expressly then the Supreme Court of the United States is prepared to presume that they are implied in the Constitution.
Now, what is the attitude which the Supreme Court has taken in this country in interpreting our Constitution ? The