Ronik Sharma

“Nation first” is more than just a catchphrase; it is not only a source of honour but also an obligation for all countrymen to follow up on this principle in letter and spirit and to view it as a constant source of dignity and pride. Everyone has witnessed what happened during the farmers’ demonstration three years ago and what has been going on over the past few days in two of the nation’s neighbouring states. The freedoms of speech, expression and peaceful protest are “treasured” in democracy and need to be upheld.The court particularly makes the most significant case that allowing peaceful demonstration is appropriate and that it is a fundamental right of demonstrators. But in the case of the freedom to protest, however, it may be restricted if it violates the rights of others or seriously affects, in general, the common public, as in the case of a demonstration that disturbs regular activities of the public or poses a threat to public safety at large. In addition to taking advantage of the young, the so called farmers organisations (agricultural associations) also push the old and infirm people to come forward and march to Delhi. It certainly depends on the circumstances and the specific policy as to whether or not it is appropriate to rationally object to both state and Central Government programmes.

However, voicing opposition to the policy is not prohibited, and it is extremely concerning to target the nation. This concern is totally undermining the democratic values of the country. Everyone had witnessed what had happened in Delhi in 2021: how these so-called farmers (protesters) entered Delhi with a planned strategy and vandalised public property. Is this the way to protest against the policy of the Government? Even at that time, these protesters not only spared the Indian National and Historical Monument “Red Fort” (Lal Qila), but forcibly entered the Red Fort, undermined the significance of the national monument in Delhi and other important places, and damaged the property of the Government, which is commonly called “public property.” The Constitution of India guarantees the right to protest and express one’s opinions, but it also imposes certain basic obligations on citizens of the country, such as Article 51A, which declares that protecting and safeguarding public property and abstaining from violence are fundamental duties. Is this not a vindictive mindset against the particular Government and the particular prime minister and Home Minister? On the other side, the Central Government is ready to talk further and fulfil all genuine demands, and it has already withdrawn the farm laws bill. But how are these protesters managing their affairs in a revengeful manner? The Central Government should now not tolerate such things.

What is happening now in farmers protests and demonstrations, and what happened during the period of so-called farmer protests last time? How much did the Central Government as well as the state Governments where these protests were held bear the loss due to them? The purpose of road blockades and toll plaza removals lasting longer than a year is to put financial strain on the State as well as Central Government’s coffers. The Government shouldn’t tolerate such people and should expose them publicly so that every countryman other than sponsored protestors understands the reality of these ongoing farmer protests. Who is funding, sponsoring, and running the affairs of the farmer protest demonstrations, and who is operating this so-called farmer protest? These protesters are not only carrying sharp-edge weapons in the shape of the farmers protest but also fully prepared, just like in a war. Blocking roads, modifications of tractors, heavy machinery, sandbags, heavy equipment, expensive masks and goggles, food stalls, tents, horses, barricade-removing machines, etc. is not only a clear violation of rules and regulations but a threat to the nation’s security, sovereignty, and integrity. Is this the way to protest against the policy of the Central Government or the State Government ?Had any national movement taken such an action? The Government must understand and expose publicly the motive behind these so-called farmer protests and demonstrations.

Is there any constitutional provision that has been written in the constitution by the framers of the constitution to carry sharp-edge weapons in the shape of the farmers protesting against the policy of the Government and protest against the Government with well-equipped lethal weapons and other banned materials? This time again, there is a protest that is completely politically motivated ahead of the forthcoming Parliament election in the country. Even if the farmers have their genuine demands, they don’t have the right to put the general public in hardship, difficulties, disturbance, and discomfort, and this is the right time for the Central Government to ensure that these farmers don’t create any nuisance once again, cause huge inconvenience to the general public at large, and vandalise public property. State Governments should also be put to task and ensure that their right to protest is not allowed to impede the common citizens’ right to lead their lives without any problem. Right to protest is not an explicit right under the provisions of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India; it can be derived from Article 19(1) (a), the right to freedom of speech and expression. Article 19(1)(b) also assures to assemble peacefully and without arms. Article 19 (2) also imposes reasonable restrictions to assemble peacefully and without arms. These reasonable restrictions are imposed only in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of the India, security of the state. Freedom of speech and expression is one of the fundamental tenets of democracy and one of the core principles on which democracy thrives and survives. However, if a protest turns violet, as seen in the many places of the farmer protest, it defeats the very purpose of the protest. In a democratic country, one must uphold their duties and responsibilities while using their fundamental rights. Respecting the law and refraining from destroying public property are the fundamental duties outlined in the constitution. Reasonable restrictions include threats to the state’s security, public order infractions, and the nation’s sovereignty and integrity. The right to peaceful demonstration is protected by law, but the right to violent protest is not, as the Apex Court has already decided. The court further decided in many cases that rallies that are violent and endanger the security of others are not protected.