Major Singh has posted Benches Across Asia: A Comparative Analysis of the Doctrine of Basic Structure on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This paper provides a comparative analysis of the Basic Structure Doctrine, using India as the reference point, and examines its reception in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Malaysia, and Singapore. Genesis from Kesavananda Bharati (1973), Basic Structure Doctrine imposes judicially enforceable limits on constitutional amendment to protect sacrosanct basic fabric of constitution. The paper shows that the doctrine’s diffusion across Asia has produced divergent outcomes: Bangladesh adopted Basic Structure Doctrine defensively against authoritarian engineering; Pakistan invoked ‘salient features’ rhetorically but stopped short of a robust strikedown power; Nepal’s courts have been cautious amid fragile political settlements; Malaysia evidences selective and aspirational judicial reassertion; and Singapore’s categorical rejection of implied unamendability in favor of parliamentary supremacy. These variations are not random: Basic Structure Doctrine flourishes where judiciaries assume the role of constitution protector and where institutional independence, political legitimacy, and a permissive political culture exist. In Absence of these enabling conditions, the doctrine tends to be symbolic or outrightly rejected. By mapping these jurisdiction-specific trajectories, the paper offers a context-sensitive account of unconstitutional constitutional amendments and reveals contingent judicial strategies 1 This is a preprint version of the manuscript. being shaped by specific political variables-a point not fully explored by pure doctrinal analysis.