Arjun Singh Rathore
The constitution of any country gets its substance not just from the letter but from the historically distilled lived experience, referred to as its spirit. The second interpretation, therefore, flows directly from our history. Undoubtedly, the background of the Indian Constitution is formed by its anti-colonial struggle, within which the seeds of a political public sphere and democratic Constitution were sown. Our elders fought hard and long to publicly express their views on colonial policies and laws, to dissent from them, to shape minds and from public opinion against them, to speak to and against the government, to challenge it. People not only signed writ petitions but staged dharnas, held large public meetings, peaceful protests and demonstrations and even, for instance in Gaandhi’sSatyagrah, launched civil disobedience movements. None of these are literally found in the Articles of the Constitution but are presupposed by it. That is why the Preamble states that India is a democratic republic.
The right to protest is protected under Article 19(1)(a), Article 19(1)(b) and Article 19(1)(c), which gives citizens of India the right to freedom of expression, the right to meet peacefully without weapons and the right to form associations or trade unions. So, protesting is not only a fundamental right granted by the Indian Constitution but protesting against injustice is also a moral duty. But it is also considered to be ‘treasure’ in respect to ensure the right of free speech and peaceful protest and it should be protected in every situation. However, the twist is that these rights are not absolute in nature and should be subjected to ‘reasonable restrictions’ on the exercise of the right to freedom of speech and expression ‘in the interest of’, the security of the state, public order, decency, morality, sovereignty and integrity of India, as provided under Article 19(2).
The experts of the constitution still believe that one must be grateful to the courts in India, for having reiterated that the right to protest is a fundamental right, otherwise any innocent student of the constitution may examine it and find that the word ‘protest’ is missing. The relevant articles of the Constitution particularly Article 19, give the right to expression, right to meet peacefully and right to form association but not the right to protest.The right to free speech and expression transforms into the right to freely express opinion on the conduct of the government. Opposition parties are valuable adversaries and not enemies, but they must compete healthily for political power.So the Fundamental rights do not exist in isolation and there should be a mutual balance between the right of protestor and commuter.
Now the question arises, Why do protests turn violent? Is it just because people are desperate? In a democracy, people participate politically not only during but between the elections. In the recent past, we are witnessing unprecedented public protests in India. Thousands continue to assemble on the streets to demonstrate and demand that the government rethink the new Acts framed or amended. Such public protests are the hallmark of a free, democratic society, whose logic demands that the voice of the people be heard by those in power and decisions be reached after proper discussion and consultation. For this, the right to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly are necessary. Research suggests people who are prepared to use violent confrontation can be psychologically different. Heavy policing do also contribute in confrontations but keeping a watch on the crowd is also very important. In otherwise nonviolent movements, some groups or radical flanks may resort to violent actions such as street rioting and most recently showing disrespect to monuments of historical & constitutional importance.
Chipko Movement in which Gaura Devi, Chandi Prasad Bhatt and others began to hug trees to prevent the then U.P government from awarding contracts to commercial loggers is one of the most important case study of any kind of non-violent protest ever held anywhere on this planet. Such movements are particularly important for those outside the mainstream, or those not educated formally. After all, any disaffected person, no matter how illiterate or powerless, can shout a slogan, hold up a placard, go on a silent march and oppose the government.
If you have a bad family, domineering parents, unkind siblings, unhealthy competition, everyone trying to be the centre of attention- that doesn’t vouch a person’s dislike for their family. The family differences are not contested on roads rather they are settled amicably behind the four walls of the house, then why we forget that My Country is My Pride, and making the otherwise non-violent protests into violent ones. On one hand we believe in Gandhi’s Satyagrah then why we forget AhinsaParmo Dharma.
Democracies everywhere are founded on two core political rights. First, the right of every citizen to freely elect their government and when dissatisfied with its performance, to vote it out of power in a legitimately held election. This remains the only proper constitutional procedure to get rid of a government and rightly so. Uses of violent protests always harm popular support for social movements. Violence alienate would- be– supporters, because people have moral issues with violence. Violence can never be perceived as justified in any circumstances, there is always a negative connotation associated to the concept of violence. The ethical dimension may be secondary or irrelevant for some movement activists, but it is generally less likely that the general public will justify violent tactics. Political violence is a taboo, according to people’s perceptions and is often incompatible with their values and needs, which are crucial aspects for movement diffusion. As a consequence, people are expected to be less likely to support/identify with social movements if they deploy violent tactics.
Movements do rewrite the history but at the same time the respective governments should be given a fair chance to prove its point. After all it will not be fair on our part to doubt the legitimacy of ‘Sabka Saath, SabkaVikas, SabkaVishwas’.
(The author is Executive Manager & Branch Head at JK Bank Marble Market, Jammu)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel