English Literature – Articles ☆ The Right to Protest, The Duty to Be Accountable ☆ Shri Jagat Singh Bisht ☆

A democracy thrives on dissent, but it thrives equally on responsibility.

The right to protest is an essential democratic freedom. However, that right does not extend to paralysing public life, destroying public property, intimidating institutions, or coercing a duly elected government into submission.

Too often, protest leaders claim credit for mobilising crowds when all is peaceful, yet distance themselves from the consequences when violence erupts, blaming “outside elements”. Accountability cannot be so selective. Those who organise and lead a protest must also accept responsibility for its conduct and its consequences.

When barricades are breached, stones are hurled, public property is vandalised, and ordinary citizens are inconvenienced for hours or days, someone must be held accountable. The cost of repairing damaged public assets should not be borne by the taxpayer but recovered from those responsible for the violence and destruction, in accordance with the law.

Equally, criticism of the police must be fair and balanced. If law enforcement is compelled to act because protesters resort to violence or defy lawful restrictions, that context cannot be ignored.

A government elected through a democratic mandate has both the authority and the responsibility to govern in accordance with the Constitution and the promises on which it sought the people’s vote. The opposition has every right to question, criticise, and persuade—but not to replace democratic debate with coercion or disorder.

The freedom to protest is a constitutional right. The freedom to indulge in violence, destroy public property, or hold society to ransom is not.

Rights and responsibilities are inseparable. In a mature democracy, both the State and the protesters must remain within the bounds of the rule of law.