Right to protest: Not absolute?
Current Affairs
On October 4, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court issued an order, emphasising its intention to examine if the right to protest is absolute. This came while the court was hearing Kisan Mahapanchayat’s petition for permission to protest against the new farm laws at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar.
The court will decide if the farmers have the right to protest when the SC has already implemented a stay on the three contentious laws.
”Violation of articles under Constitution”
The Kisan Mahapanchayat has filed a petition with SC, seeking permission as their request has been rejected by the Delhi Police repeatedly between April and July 2021.
The petition blames the respondent authority of arbitrariness and discrimination, as another farmer’s body Samyukt Kisan Morcha was granted permission.
The petitioners claim that the standing order of Delhi Police is in violation of Articles 14 (Right to equality), 19 (Freedom of speech and expression) and 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution of India.
Fundamental rights
The right to protest is a fundamental right in the Indian Constitution. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, and 19(1)(b) assures citizens the right to assemble peaceably and without arms.
The right to free speech and expression transforms into the right to freely express an opinion on the conduct of the government.
The right to peaceably assemble allows political parties and citizenship bodies to question and object to acts of the government by demonstrations, agitations and public meetings, to launch sustained protest movements.
Restrictions on right to assemble
Article 19(2) imposes reasonable restrictions on the right to assemble peaceably and without arms. These reasonable restrictions are imposed in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.
While the constitution provides for freedom to assemble as a right, the procedural provisions radically restrict this freedom, by empowering the state to regulate its expression and peremptorily curtail its exercise.
Prior permission from the commissioner required
In the 1973 HimatLal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police Ahmedabad judgment, the SC held that seeking prior permission in writing from the police before holding a public meeting on a public street did not violate the fundamental right to protest.
"the right which flows from Art. 19 (1) (b) is not a right to hold a meeting at any place and time. It is a right which can be regulated."
Public places cannot be occupied indefinitely
Protests against the Indian Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 between December 2019 and March 2020, saw protestors occupying a busy arterial road by creating facilities in addition to having over 300 people.
Protestors argued that there existed an absolute right to peaceful protest, both in terms of space and numbers. Conversely, the court attempted to reach a conclusion by balancing the rights of protestors with that of commuters.
On October 7 2020, SC held that public places cannot be occupied indefinitely while exercising the right to peacefully protest.
Is it an “absolute right”?
In December 2020, SC declared that as long as the protest does not result in loss of life or property, the farmers have the right to protest and it will not interfere.
However, after the Lakhimpur Kheri incident, the top court has pulled up the farmer bodies questioning why the protests are still going on since the matter is sub judice, and will decide if they have an “absolute right” to protest, as “no one takes responsibility” of the violence.
Farmers response
Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM) called for “rail roko” yesterday, protesting over the Lakhimpur incident. While the protest affected more than 290 trains and 40 were cancelled, SKM claims that the protests were held peacefully.
SC’s hearing on the right to protest is tomorrow, ahead of the crucial hearing, multiple farmer unions have asked for reinforcements at Delhi borders, calling “Chalo Delhi”, attempting to renew the protest and have asked farmers from neighbouring states to join them.
The STEM gap for women
Science
This year’s Nobel prize winners for Science saw no women receiving the award. It appears that men continue to dominate the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) category. However, in contrast, last year, several women (4 out of 11) emerged as winners.
“The lack of women awarded in the sciences this year felt like a giant step backward,” said Sandy Robert, the chief executive of the Association for Women in Science.
Good news at the start of the pipeline
In recent decades, there have been substantial efforts at the academic level to eradicate this underrepresentation of women and girls. The traditional stereotype of “women can’t do math and science” is now being challenged and dismissed at least at the grassroot level.
According to World Bank data, percentage-wise there are more Indian female STEM graduates (43%) at the tertiary level than those belonging to developed nations like the US (34%), UK (38%), Germany (27%) and France (32%).
Women can’t really have it all
Women conquering both their professional and personal life together is really just an impossible scenario in today’s capitalist work culture.
Especially in scientific academia, it’s really difficult to navigate and progress in the workplace while balancing out personal commitments, as one needs to dedicate a lot of time to research. Also, having children and tackling familial obligations are just too much to handle with work with no support whatsoever.
Some research indicates that family-friendly policies such as leave and onsite child care can exacerbate gender inequity to a certain extent.
Confidence
In the tech industry, women are still hugely outnumbered, which fuels the imposter syndrome. This is also accompanied by anxiety and depression. When women are successful in any endeavour professionally, they often tend to deflect the praise or brush it off as luck. While this tendency is not just limited to women, as men also face it at some level, the fact is that women are outnumbered in it.
Implicit biases about who does science
96% of the Science Nobel Prize winners have been men. This leads to an implicit bias against women working as experts and academic scientists. For instance :
Men’s scholarships are valued and acknowledged more than those of women.
Letters of recommendation for women are more likely to raise doubts and use language that results in negative career outcomes.
Women are underrepresented in journal editorships
Women’s solo-authored research takes twice as long to move through the review process
Women experts are quoted less frequently in news and are also given less respect and recognition compared to their male counterparts.
Networking/guidance opportunities
Male-dominated workplaces, at most times, can leave women feeling isolated. Women are often excluded from networking opportunities and social events. If they want to ask questions, learn more about their career path, or have some guidance, they might feel clueless as to where to seek some solace or help.
This isolation can also be exacerbated when women are unable to participate in work events or attend conferences because of family or child care responsibilities.
Are gender quotas the solution?
Many propose that there should be quotas to grant a specific number of Nobel Prizes to women every year. While this might look like a feasible option, the reality is that this would never change the societal behaviour towards women in STEM.
“We worry that if somebody proposed that to us, one year we would give the prize only to women. Then it would be, we fear, considered that those laureates got the prize because they are women and not because they are the best.” says Goran K. Hansson, the secretary-general of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Can we really fix this?
Addressing structural, societal and implicit bias in STEM might hopefully prevent another half-century wait before the next woman is acknowledged with a Nobel Prize for her contribution to Physics.
We look forward to the day when a woman receiving the most prestigious award in science is newsworthy only for her breakthrough contribution and not her gender.
At the end of the day, it's all about a communal support system that needs to take place with all the genders and communities holding hands together and creating a system in which no one group is bearing the burden.
Like what you read? Share this article with your friends and follow us on:
Instagram | Medium | LinkedIn