Supreme Court to Frame Guidelines for Police Handling of Public Protests

Syllabus: GS2/Polity and Governance

Context

• The Supreme Court of India decided to lay down pan-India guidelines on the police’s handling of public protests, acknowledging the constitutional right to peaceful protest but also emphasising the value of a law-enforcer’s life.

Background

• The order was passed on petitions alleging police excesses during the nationwide protests by students after the NEET exam paper leak. 
• The petitioners sought national norms to regulate the police response to demonstrations and to avoid the arbitrary use of force.
• The Court said peaceful protest is a cornerstone of democracy but said protests should be peaceful and cannot violate the rights of others or threaten public safety.

Constitutional Basis of the Right to Protest

• The Constitution does not explicitly mention a “right to protest”; however, it is derived from several Fundamental Rights:
  • Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression.
  • Article 19(1)(b): Right to assemble peacefully and without arms.
  • Article 19(1)(c): Right to form associations or unions.
• However these rights are subject to reasonable restrictions under:
  • Article 19(2): Sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, public order, decency, morality, etc.
  • Article 19(3): Restrictions on peaceful assembly in the interest of public order and sovereignty.

Challenges in Tackling Public Unrest

• Distinguishing peaceful protestors from violent or anti-social forces that infiltrate protests.
• Maintaining public order while not compromising on fundamental freedoms, especially during big demonstrations.
• Handling misinformation and rumours circulating on social media, which can quickly increase emotions.
• Avoid disruption to vital public services, transport infrastructure and economic activity during extended demonstrations.
• Ensuring the safety and lives of both demonstrators and police in hazardous situations.
• Limited availability of current crowd-control tools, including body cameras, surveillance systems and non-lethal technologies;
• Lack of staff and lack specialist training are among the capacity constraints of police units.

Supreme Court Judgments

• Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012): The Supreme Court of India held that peaceful protest is a basic right, the freedom to sleep is part of life under Article 21 and midnight police crackdowns on sleeping masses are illegal.
• Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018): The Supreme Court concluded that the right to peaceful protest is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) and Article 19(1)(b).
  • It said limits on public meetings must pass the requirements of constitutionality of reasonableness, necessity and proportionality.
• Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020): The Court held that public routes and public spaces cannot be occupied indefinitely for protests balancing the fundamental right to peaceful dissent with the rights of the general public.
• D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997): The Court established down necessary standards to prohibit arbitrary arrest, detention and custodial assault. It held that police powers must be exercised in accordance with the rule of law and Article 21 of the Constitution.

Way Ahead

• Formulate standard pan-India Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for police dealing with peaceful protests in accordance with Supreme Court instructions.
• Embed the principles of necessity, proportionality and minimum use of force in crowd control activities.
• Strengthen the implementation of the Supreme Court’s orders on police reforms, operational autonomy and accountability in Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006).
• Use technology-enabled policing includes body worn cameras, drones, CCTV surveillance and digital evidence management.
• Enhance police training on negotiation, mediation, de-escalation tactics, human rights and community policing.

Source: TH