Right to Protest: Importance, Judgments & Issues

Recently, police action against protesters in New Delhi reignited debate over the constitutional right to protest and Section 163 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

About Right to Protest in India

• Meaning: The constitutional right enabling citizens to peacefully express dissent, assemble, and demand accountability while remaining subject to reasonable restrictions.

Constitutional Basis

• Free Expression: Article 19(1)(a) guarantees citizens the freedom to express opinions, criticism, and democratic dissent peacefully.
• Peaceful Assembly: Articles 19(1)(b) & 19(1)(c) ensure peaceful assembly and formation of associations for collective democratic action.
• Reasonable Restrictions: Articles 19(2), 19(3) & 21 permit lawful restrictions balancing individual freedoms with public order and security.

Importance of Right to Protest

• Democratic Participation: Enables citizens to influence governance between elections, strengthening democracy. E.g., Anti-Corruption Movement, 2011 (Lokpal Act).
• Government Accountability: Pressures governments to address public grievances and reconsider unpopular policies. E.g., Farmers’ Protests (Farm Laws Repeal).
• Rights Protection: Empowers marginalised communities to secure justice, equality, and constitutional rights. E.g., Dalit, Women’s and Disability Rights Movements.
• Social Transformation: Promotes progressive reforms through collective action. E.g., Freedom Struggle and Chipko Movement.
• Democratic Safety Valve: Provides peaceful dissent, preventing unrest while reinforcing constitutional governance. E.g., Ramlila Maidan Judgment, 2012.

Supreme Court Judgments on Right to Protest

• Himat Lal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police (1973): State may regulate public meetings but cannot arbitrarily prohibit peaceful assemblies and democratic expression.
• Ramlila Maidan Incident v. Home Secretary, Union of India (2012): Peaceful protest is fundamental; excessive police force violates constitutional rights and democratic freedoms.
• Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018): Section 144 is valid temporarily; regulation cannot become a permanent prohibition on peaceful protests.
• Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (Shaheen Bagh Case, 2020): Protests should occur at designated sites without indefinitely blocking public roads or essential movement.
• Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020): Restrictions on fundamental rights must satisfy the tests of necessity, proportionality, and reasonableness.

Issues in Exercising the Right to Protest

• Emergency Misuse: Repeated Section 163 BNSS orders convert temporary emergency powers into routine restrictions, limiting democratic dissent.
• Permission Denials: Arbitrary refusals of protest permissions effectively prohibit assemblies, contrary to MKSS v. Union of India (2018).
• Police Excesses: Lathi charges, tear gas, and internet shutdowns raise proportionality concerns. E.g., Ramlila Maidan Incident 2012.
• Dissent Criminalisation: Criminal proceedings against peaceful protesters discourage democratic participation. E.g., post-Shaheen Bagh protest-related prosecutions.
• Public Disruption: Indefinite road blockades inconvenience commuters. E.g., Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020) mandated designated protest sites.

Way Forward

• Rights-Based Framework: Facilitate, not suppress, peaceful protests through transparent regulations, as reaffirmed in MKSS v. Union of India (2018).
• Emergency Restraint: Restrict Section 163 BNSS to genuine emergencies with written reasons, judicial review, and sunset clauses.
• Uniform Guidelines: Adopt nationwide SOPs covering permissions, crowd management, police conduct, and use of force, following Prakash Singh (2006) police reforms.
• Institutional Dialogue: Establish regular coordination among protesters, police, and administration to peacefully resolve disputes, reducing confrontation and violence.
• Protest Infrastructure: Develop modern protest sites with essential amenities, learning from Jantar Mantar, Delhi’s designated demonstration venue.

“Dissent is the safety valve of democracy,“ observed the Supreme Court in the Ramlila Maidan case. India must ensure that regulation facilitates peaceful protests while safeguarding public order and constitutional freedoms.

Reference: The Indian Express

PMF IAS Pathfinder for Mains – Question 754

Q. Do you think frequent restrictions on peaceful protests risk undermining constitutional freedoms and democratic accountability? Discuss the role of the Right to Protest within the broader framework of public order and constitutional governance. (250 Words) (15 Marks)

Approach

• Introduction: Write a brief introduction about the right to protest in India.
• Body: Write how frequent restrictions on protests undermine constitutional freedoms and democratic accountability; also discuss the role of the Right to Protest within the broader framework of public order and constitutional governance, with the way forward.
• Conclusion: Emphasis on a rights-based approach to safeguard peaceful protests, strengthen democratic participation, and uphold constitutional freedoms.