Mechanisms of Constitutional Limitation

Only the third statement is accurate. Article 13 establishes judicial review, serving as a critical check on legislative overreach. The first statement is false because the system is designed to prevent any branch (including the legislature) from achieving absolute supremacy. The second statement is false because checks and balances complement, rather than contradict, the separation of powers. The fourth statement is false because a single-party majority typically weakens checks and balances by allowing the executive to easily rubber-stamp legislation.

The Assertion is true; the judiciary serves as a check on the legislature. Reason 1 correctly supports this by identifying Article 13 (judicial review) as the mechanism. Reason 2 is constitutionally false; the judiciary can strike down laws, but under the separation of powers, it is strictly forbidden from drafting or proposing legislation itself.

The second dynamic is unfolding. A massive single-party majority effectively fuses the executive and the legislature, severely weakening legislative checks on executive power. Consequently, the burden of maintaining constitutional balance shifts heavily to the judiciary, which must utilize mechanisms like Article 13 to check the dominant government.

Only two claims are valid (Statements 3 and 4). Article 13 is a check, and single-party majorities degrade the equilibrium. Statement 1 is false (it prevents supremacy of any one branch). Statement 2 is false (it complements, rather than nullifies, separation of powers).