Protecting protest: On mass protests

This article discusses the legal and ethical complexities surrounding mass protests, specifically focusing on the balance between state authority and the constitutional right to dissent. It highlights concerns over police use of force and the judiciary's role in regulating public demonstrations.
A defining feature of the recent Cockroach Janta Party agitation related to its underestimation by the government, which hoped to quell the protests by force. The net result was widespread student anger, which served to entrench the agitation. The Supreme Court has just commenced hearing petitions on the police’s alleged use of disproportionate force , especially on July 20 in Delhi and a constable’s aerial firing of an assault rifle allegedly to disperse crowds on July 25 in Bihar’s Siwan. The Court has also agreed to hear petitions from the families of police personnel claiming that they were assaulted and “lynched”. The ferocity of the July 20 police crackdown against protesters is not in doubt; in addition to tear gas, videos also purported to show the police using lathis studded with nails. But as Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed, the state should also answer why some police officers allegedly lacked protective gear. Under-equipped police are more likely to escalate force out of fear, and this is why international best practices in crowd control involve graduated responses. There is also merit in pleas that the same police force accused of using excess force also investigating it could potentially undermine credibility.
Get the full story
Sign up for Headlinne to unlock AI insights, political bias analysis, and your personalized news feed.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in