As authorities worldwide grapple with demonstrations over issues like political rights and racial justice, a UN committee has reaffirmed that protesting peacefully, online or in person, is a fundamental human right.
What is the news?
-
The independent experts on the Human Rights Committee published a fresh interpretation of the right of peaceful assembly.
-
The committee is tasked with monitoring how countries implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which under Article 21 guarantees the right to peaceful assembly.
About ICCPR
-
The ICCPR is a multilateral treaty adopted by UN General Assembly Resolution on 16 December 1966, and in force from 23 March 1976.
-
The covenant commits its parties to respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the right to life, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, electoral rights and rights to due process and a fair trial.
-
As of September 2019, the Covenant has 173 parties and six more signatories without ratification.
-
It is part of the International Bill of Human Rights, along with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
-
It is monitored by the UN Human Rights Committee (a separate body to the UN Human Rights Council).
SC view on Right to Protest:
The Supreme Court has found the indefinite “occupation” of a public road by the Shaheen Bagh protestors unacceptable.
Right to Protest
-
The right to protest is the manifestation of the right to freedom of assembly, the right to freedom of association, and the right to freedom of speech.
-
The Constitution of India provides the right of freedom, given in Article 19 with the view of guaranteeing individual rights that were considered vital by the framers of the constitution.
-
The Right to protest peacefully is enshrined in Article 19(1) (a) guarantees the freedom of speech and expression; Article 19(1) (b) assures citizens the right to assemble peaceably and without arms.
-
Article 19(2) imposes reasonable restrictions on the right to assemble peaceably and without arms.
What did the Court say?
-
The court said the protest, considered an iconic dissent mounted by mothers, children and senior citizens of Shaheen Bagh against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, became inconvenient to commuters.
-
The judgment upheld the right to peaceful protest against the law but made it unequivocally clear that public ways and public spaces cannot be occupied, and that too indefinitely.
-
Democracy and dissent go hand in hand, but then the demonstrations expressing dissent have to be in designated places alone.
-
The present case was not even one of the protests taking place in an undesignated area but was a blockage of a public way which caused grave inconvenience to commuters.
Reasonable restrictions do exist in practice
-
Fundamental rights do not live in isolation. The right of the protester has to be balanced with the right of the commuter. They have to co-exist in mutual respect.
-
The court held it was entirely the responsibility of the administration to prevent encroachments in public spaces.