GS Paper 2 15 marks · 250w 14 min Medium
Which steps are required for constitutionalization of a Commission? Do you think imparting constitutionality to the National Commission for Women would ensure greater gender justice and empowerment in India? Give reasons.
Subtopic: Constitution & Polity · constitutional status for commissions (NCW)
How to structure your answer
Introduction → Steps for constitutionalisation under Article 368 (special majority, ratification test, precedents of NCST and NCBC) → Case for a constitutional NCW: permanence, autonomy, authority → Why status alone will not guarantee gender justice → Conclusion
Written within the word limit
280 words · target 250 words · 14 min
Constitutionalisation means embedding a body in the Constitution itself, so that its existence, composition and powers no longer depend on ordinary law. The National Commission for Women (NCW) is currently only a statutory body under the NCW Act, 1990.
Steps required for constitutionalisation
- A Constitution Amendment Bill under Article 368, introduced in either House of Parliament.
- Passage in each House by special majority — a majority of the total membership and two-thirds of members present and voting; there is no joint sitting for constitutional amendments.
- Ratification by half the state legislatures is needed only where the amendment touches the federal features listed in the proviso to Article 368(2); inserting a commission ordinarily does not, as the 89th Amendment (2003) creating the NCST under Article 338A and the 102nd Amendment (2018) creating the NCBC under Article 338B showed.
- Presidential assent, followed by consequential provisions on composition, tenure and service conditions.
Would a constitutional NCW ensure greater gender justice?
- Arguments in favour: permanence beyond legislative repeal; security of tenure and financial autonomy; the standing to be consulted on major policy affecting women, on par with the NCSC and NCST; and reports laid before Parliament that compel a formal government response.
- Grounds for caution: the NCSC's constitutional status has not by itself curbed atrocities — its powers remain largely recommendatory; the NCW's real constraints are weak investigative capacity, dependence on government staffing and politicised appointments; and gender justice ultimately turns on enforcement of the POSH Act, the Domestic Violence Act and socio-economic empowerment through education, work participation and property rights.
Constitutional status would raise the NCW's stature and insulation, but it must be paired with binding enforcement powers, an independent cadre and transparent appointments if status is to translate into justice.
What an examiner expects to see
- Constitutionalisation route: Constitution Amendment Bill under Article 368, special majority in both Houses, no joint sitting, presidential assent.
- State ratification applies only if federal features in the proviso to Article 368(2) are touched — the 89th (NCST, Art 338A) and 102nd (NCBC, Art 338B) Amendments did not require it.
- Precedents prove feasibility: NCSC (Art 338), NCST (2003) and NCBC (2018) are all constitutional commissions.
- Case for a constitutional NCW: permanence, tenure security, financial autonomy, mandatory consultation, parliamentary reporting.
- Case for caution: constitutional status has not made the NCSC effective — powers stay recommendatory; NCW's real gaps are capacity, staffing and politicised appointments.
- Gender justice depends more on enforcing the POSH Act and PWDVA and on socio-economic empowerment than on the commission's legal pedigree.
- Conclusion: constitutionalisation is a necessary signal but not a sufficient condition — pair it with enforcement powers and independent appointments.
Concrete cases, schemes and judgments
- 89th Constitutional Amendment (2003) — NCST created under Article 338A
- 102nd Constitutional Amendment (2018) — NCBC elevated under Article 338B
- NCW Act, 1990 — current statutory basis with civil-court powers for inquiries
- POSH Act, 2013 and Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 as the enforcement layer
- NCW interventions on NRI marital abandonment and fast-track courts after 2012
Terminology to weave into the answer
constitutionalisationArticle 368 special majorityArticle 338B precedentstatutory versus constitutional bodyrecommendatory powersgender justice