On Sunday, the Supreme Court heard a contempt petition contending that Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation chairperson D Thara had defied an order issued on Friday relating to free movement and assembly during Saturday’s protests in Jantar Mantar.
In response, the court ordered that people be allowed to move freely, subject to traffic regulations; that the barricades erected in Delhi be reviewed; that internet services remain undisturbed, subject to law; and that no one be detained except by procedure established by law.
It added that peaceful assembly should be permitted in accordance with law, and that lawyers, journalists and others should not be impeded in their professional duties.
The court issued notice to Mohan, Kumar and Thara and sought a counter-affidavit and compliance report by October 13 – even as many restrictions stayed in place.
This underscored a significant lacuna. The right to protest is not meaningful merely because it appears in the Constitution or because a court can reaffirm it after the event. It must be protected at the moment it is exercised.
If the state can restrict transport, barricade public spaces and detain organisers and journalists before a protest begins and if judicial review comes only after the demonstration has passed, the right...