Misunderstanding between Constitutional Amendment and Constitutional Replacement in 1946 and 1948

Abstract

Amendment to the constitution and constitutional replacement are two distinct notions. In summary, constitutional amendments often include a lesser degree of change in terms of constitutional provisions, both qualitatively and quantitatively, compared to constitutional replacements.

When one considers the constitution-making events of 1946 and 1948 and the resulting constitutions, one immediately realises that both constitution-making events may be regarded as constitutional replacement processes rather than constitutional amendment processes.

However, constitution-making bodies in both eras might misread the concept and characterized their responsibilities as amending rather than replacing preceding constitutions. Additionally, they invoked the idea of constitutional continuity to defend their actions as a constitution-amending organization, despite the fact that they were replacing the constitutions.