RIGHT TO PROTEST
1. Context
People from across the country gathered at Jantar Mantar in central Delhi on July 20 for the Cockroach Janta Party’s (CJP) “Chalo Sansad” march, carrying placards demanding reforms in the National Testing Agency (NTA) and the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan.
2. Is the Right to Protest Absolute?
- The right to protest is one of the defining features of a democratic society. In India, citizens have the constitutional freedom to express their opinions, criticize government policies, and peacefully assemble to voice their concerns.
- However, while the Constitution guarantees this freedom, the right to protest is not an absolute right. It is subject to reasonable restrictions to ensure that the exercise of one person's rights does not infringe upon the rights of others or threaten public order.
- The Constitution of India does not explicitly mention a separate "right to protest." Instead, this right is derived from a combination of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19.
- Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, enabling citizens to express their views and dissent against government actions.
- Article 19(1)(b) provides the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, while Article 19(1)(c) guarantees the freedom to form associations or unions. Together, these provisions form the constitutional foundation for peaceful protests and demonstrations in India.
- However, these freedoms are not unlimited. The Constitution itself recognizes that unrestricted exercise of these rights may sometimes conflict with larger public interests.
- Therefore, Article 19(2) empowers the State to impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency, morality, contempt of court, defamation, and incitement to an offence.
- Similarly, Article 19(3) permits reasonable restrictions on the right to peaceful assembly in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India and the maintenance of public order.
- As a result, while citizens have the constitutional right to organize protests, they cannot claim an unrestricted right to conduct demonstrations in any manner or at any place.
- A protest that turns violent, damages public or private property, obstructs emergency services, or indefinitely blocks roads and public spaces may lawfully be regulated or restricted by the authorities.
- The objective of these restrictions is not to suppress dissent but to ensure that the exercise of one group’s rights does not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of other citizens.
- The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly emphasized the importance of balancing the right to protest with the interests of society.
- In Himat Lal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police (1973), the Court held that citizens have the right to hold public meetings, but the State is empowered to regulate the use of public streets and public places through reasonable regulations.
- This decision clarified that while the State cannot arbitrarily prohibit public assemblies, it can prescribe reasonable conditions regarding the time, place, and manner of protests.
3. What Standards Govern Police Action?
- The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), in its Manual on Human Rights for Police Officers, underscores that effective law enforcement and the protection of human rights are not competing goals but mutually reinforcing responsibilities.
- According to the manual, professional policing in a democratic society must be firmly rooted in constitutional values, ensuring that the police act not merely as law enforcement agencies but as guardians of citizens' rights while upholding the rule of law and maintaining public safety without discrimination.
- The manual further explains that a democracy such as India requires a policing system that treats all individuals equally and safeguards their rights alongside maintaining peace and security.
- It cautions that violations of human rights by police personnel can have far-reaching consequences. Such actions not only weaken public trust in law enforcement agencies but also damage the credibility of public institutions and, in certain situations, may contribute to heightened social tensions and civil unrest.
- These standards are also in harmony with the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which lay down internationally accepted norms governing police conduct.
- The principles mandate that any use of force by law enforcement authorities must satisfy the tests of legality, necessity, and proportionality.
- In other words, force should be exercised only when permitted by law, only to the extent required by the circumstances, and in a manner proportionate to the legitimate objective being pursued
4. When Can the Police Use Force?
- The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) empowers an Executive Magistrate or a police officer authorised by law to direct the dispersal of an unlawful assembly or any gathering that is likely to disrupt public peace or endanger public order.
- If the participants fail to comply with such lawful directions, the authorities are legally permitted to disperse the assembly through the use of force. However, this power is not unrestricted and must be exercised strictly within the limits prescribed by law.
- The Code of Conduct for the Police in India stresses that coercive measures should always be the last resort. It advises police personnel to first rely on peaceful methods such as dialogue, persuasion, counselling, warnings, and other non-violent means to encourage compliance.
- Only when these measures prove ineffective and the use of force becomes unavoidable should force be employed. Even then, the police are expected to use only the minimum amount of force necessary to achieve the lawful objective, ensuring that the response remains proportionate to the situation.
- The recent protests have also reignited concerns regarding police accountability and transparency, particularly after visual evidence surfaced showing several police personnel without clearly visible name badges or with their faces covered.
- Such practices make it difficult to identify individual officers and can hinder accountability in cases involving allegations of excessive force or misconduct.
- The BNSS specifically mandates that every police officer making an arrest must display clear and visible identification bearing his or her name.
- However, the law does not prescribe an equivalent requirement for police personnel engaged in crowd management, riot control, or the dispersal of public assemblies.
- This legal gap has prompted renewed discussions on whether similar identification standards should also apply during crowd-control operations to strengthen transparency, public confidence, and accountability in policing.
5. Way Forward
Over the years, the Supreme Court of India has consistently developed a robust body of jurisprudence defining both the scope of the constitutional right to protest and the legal boundaries within which police authorities may exercise their powers. Through a series of landmark judgments, the Court has sought to strike a balance between protecting democratic dissent and preserving public order, while ensuring that law enforcement agencies remain accountable for their actions.
|
For Premins: Indian Polity and Governance, Fundamental rights, Fundamental Duties
For Mains: General Studies II: Indian Constitution—historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure.
|
|
Previous Year Questions
1.Other than the Fundamental Rights, which of the following parts of the Constitution of India reflect/reflects the principles and provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)? (UPSC CSE 2020)
Select the correct answer using the code given below: (a) 1 and 2 only Answer: (d) 2.Consider the following: (UPSC CSE 2011)
Which of the above is/are Human Right/Human Rights under “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”? (a) 1 only Answer: (d)
1.Though the Human Rights Commissions have contributed immensely to the protection of human rights in India, yet they have failed to assert themselves against the mighty and powerful. Analysing theirstructural and practical limitations, suggest remedial measures. (UPSC CSE Mains GS 1 2021) |
Source: The Hindu
