Right to protest

THE right to protest is protected under Article 19 of the Constitution. Citizens have a right to assemble peacefully and protest against the action or inaction on the part of the State. What’s becoming an issue of concern, particularly in Punjab, is the repeated recourse — almost a given — to blocking roads and railway tracks when something irks someone. The protesters base their argument on past experience, which is that memorandums and dharnas count for little and only the disruption of traffic and essential services has the desired effect of forcing the authorities to take cognisance. The counter-argument is equally persuasive. What purpose does it serve to inconvenience fellow citizens day in and day out? If the authorities are at fault, why make the people suffer? The normalisation of disruption is a telling commentary on a State that does not care — for protesters and public alike.

It is essential to guard against a citizen versus citizen binary taking root. A situation, where both protesters and citizens harbour the notion of being victims, does not augur well for democracy. It dilutes the legitimate demand of protesters and makes citizens immune to legitimate causes. No one gains. The use of the term ‘andolanjeevi’, in the protests against the Modi government’s three farm laws drew criticism, and rightly so. People in our region stood as one, in solidarity with the protesting farmers. If these selfsame citizens — known for backing a worthy cause — increasingly feel they are at the receiving end, those leading the protests need to introspect. The methods being adopted are not helping.

Meanwhile, another ‘andolanjeevi,’ the well-known Ladakhi activist Sonam Wangchuk is not being allowed to have his say in Delhi. Section 144, the Raj-era section in the revamped penal code, has been imposed all over the capital’s New Delhi district, prohibiting the gathering of more than five people. This is unimaginable in Punjab. That is why we must further nurture the tradition of talking truth to power, but not at the cost of societal disjointedness.