The Right to Freedom is not only a base but a building block of any democratic country, and this fundamental Right carries much weight behind it in terms of many rights and duties of citizens and governments to administrate the country democratically. Among many rights, we have the Right to protest, which allows us to voice our opinions against government policies, arbitrary actions, or any social issue that arises in society and needs government action to tackle and improve the situation.
However, in the 21st Century, governments are more inclined to ban protests and take strict actions against protestors rather than listen to them by transferring peaceful protest to criminal acts. People are getting hefty fines and, in many cases, have lost their government jobs after raising their voices.
So, this paper will explore the global trend of protest criminalization and highlight the role of international human rights bodies in countering these suppressive measures and advocating for legal protections with the help of various case studies from India and across the nation.
Introduction
Freedom to act in any manner is vital for the entire human fraternity. People from across the nation fight for their freedoms in numerous ways, for many types of freedom, to express their various acts. From all of those, we often see freedom of speech, taught, expression, speech, taught, movement, information, and protest.
This Right has mentioned in the Indian Constitution as a fundamental right of citizens under Article 19, which provides Freedom of Speech and Expression that is Article 19(1)(a),[1] the Right to Assemble Peacefully and Without Arms, is Article 19(1)(b)[2] and Reasonable Restrictions- that is Article 19(2).
If we look at United nation instruments also have clauses for the same like Article 20(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, which recognizes the Right to peaceful assembly and association; Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 guarantees freedom of expression and UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly and Association which reports on the misuse of legal frameworks to suppress protests across the nation.
If we look at different nations collectively, Europe has the European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, in which Article 11 guarantees the Right to freedom of assembly and association.[3] Many other countries have protection clauses for the same, except a few countries like China, which is totally under government control and rarely hears about protests in China.
So, by this, we understand how important it is to protect citizens rights rather than suppress them. It ensures democratic accountability and minority rights protection and drives social change drives in the country to balance the people’s voice with state-imposed limitations. However, we have seen much suppression of voices in many countries through various means.
Increasing Trend of Criminalizing Protests Across the Globe and in India
Recent decades have seen many steps towards the suppression and criminalization of protests by governments using legal frameworks, citing security reasons, force, and digital surveillance to suppress dissent. Historically, protest has played a significant role in transforming government policies for the betterment of society.
For example, “Gandhi’s Salt March protest against British taxation sent Mahatma Gandhi on a 23-day, 240-mile journey to the coast of India to collect his salt, which was illegal under crown laws. More than 60,000 people, including Gandhi himself, were incarcerated for participating in the Salt March, but it ultimately turned the tide of world sympathy towards Indian, rather than British, interests.”
Protests help society shape better governance, but states are now implementing restrictive laws, mass arrests, and advanced surveillance technologies to control public demonstrations. Furthermore, this trend raises serious concerns about the erosion of civil liberties and the decline of democratic spaces.
Few Global Patterns of Protest Criminalization
In the US, “Eight states have passed laws cracking down on protest activity since Black Lives Matter protests erupted across the United States, according to the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law, which tracks such legislation.” “The bills typically define ‘riot’ as a gathering of three or more people threatening public safety.”
Furthermore, many countries have introduced strict laws and increased protest penalties. The UK government introduced the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, 2022, which expanded police powers to restrict demonstrations and impose hefty fines. China introduced the National Security Law (2020), which criminalized protests in Hong Kong, leading to mass arrests.
The Iranian government is highly suppressing “Woman, Life, Freedom” protesters, who are mainly women demanding their fundamental rights. “So far, 10 men have been executed in the context of the protests, and at least 11 men and three women remain at risk of being executed, including for protected conduct, against the backdrop of serious concerns over adherence to the right to a fair trial, including the use of torture-tainted confessions and due process violations.”
In France, the government used a colossal police force to stop protests on pension reforms. Governments are using various other methods to suppress protests, such as surveillance, facial recognition, Pegasus spyware, and social media monitoring to track and intimidate activists.
In the Indian context, state governments have used legal frameworks and false provisions to prevent protests. India has witnessed a growing trend of criminalizing dissent through legal and extra-legal measures. Authorities have used sedition charges and internet shutdowns, and protesters have faced mass detentions under the UAPA. “India leads the world in internet shutdowns for the sixth consecutive year,” often justifying them on the grounds of national security or to prevent unrest. Notable examples include the Farmers’ Protest (2020–21) and the CAA-NRC Protests (2019–20).
National Laws Regulating Protests in India and Apex Court Judgements
India has protected the Right to Freedom and Expression as a fundamental right for its citizens, with reasonable restrictions under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, while Article 19(1)(b) grants citizens the right to assemble peaceably and without arms. This provision ensures smooth democratic governance and enables citizen participation in democratic activities such as voting, peaceful protesting, or criticizing the government.
Nevertheless, these rights are not absolute. Under Article 19(3), the State can impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of:
- Public order
- Security of the State
- Friendly relations with foreign states
- Sovereignty and integrity of India
- Prevention of contempt of court
These constitutional safeguards are supported by various judgments from the apex court of India, reinforcing citizens’ trust in the democratic framework. The Supreme Court has reaffirmed these rights in several landmark decisions.
In Amit Sahni (Shaheen Bagh, In re) v. State, (2020) 10 SCC 439, the Court observed:
“India, as we know it today, traces its foundation back to when the seeds of protest during our freedom struggle were sown deep, to flower into a democracy eventually… Article 19, one of the cornerstones of the Constitution of India, confers upon its citizens two treasured rights — the right to speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and the right to assemble peacefully without arms under Article 19(1)(b)… These rights enable every citizen to protest against the actions or inactions of the State.” (Para 16)
In the case of Natasha Narwal v. State of NCT of Delhi, the Delhi High Court noted:
“We are constrained to express that it seems, in its anxiety to suppress dissent, the State appears to be blurring the line between constitutionally guaranteed protest and terrorist activity. If this mindset gains traction, it would be a sad day for democracy.”
Similarly, in Uday Pratap Singh v. Union of India, the Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the right to protest, stating:
“In a democracy, farmers cannot be stopped from entering the state.”
In Ramlila Maidan Incident v. Home Secretary, Union of India, (2012) 5 SCC 1, the Supreme Court observed:
“The threat of going on a hunger strike extended by Baba Ramdev… cannot be termed unconstitutional or barred under any law. It is a form of protest which has been accepted historically and legally in our constitutional jurisprudence.”
In Anita Thakur v. State of J&K, (2016) 15 SCC 525, the Court further clarified:
“Article 19(1)(a) ensures freedom of speech… Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peacefully and without arms. The right to move freely under Article 19(1)(d) ensures the ability to take out peaceful marches… One cherished aspect of Indian democracy is the tradition of expressing grievances through direct action or peaceful protest.”
These judgments underscore both the strength and fragility of protest rights in India, revealing inconsistencies in judicial interpretation and executive implementation. Often, state authorities discriminate against protestors based on political affiliations, leading to selective enforcement of the law.
Notable Protests in India
India has witnessed several major protests in recent years, each highlighting diverse causes – from resisting policy changes to demanding justice. Prominent among them are:
- Wrestlers’ Protest (2023)
- Shaheen Bagh Protests (2019–2020)
- Anti-Farm Laws Protest (2020–2021)
- R.G. Kar Protests, Kolkata (2024)
- Maharashtra Maratha Quota Protests (2024)
- Climate Justice Rally, Ladakh (2024)
- Student Protests Against NEET Irregularities (2024)
In all these protests, lakhs of citizens took to the streets to demand their rights, speedy justice, transparent governance, and systemic reforms. However, a consistent pattern emerges — governmental efforts to suppress dissent. Despite constitutional protections, enforcement remains inconsistent.
Laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and Section 144 of the CrPC are regularly invoked to curb protests. While the Supreme Court has acknowledged the legitimacy of peaceful protests, it has also occasionally constrained their scope to preserve public order.
Former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud aptly remarked:
“The ethos of democracy is harmed when dissent is labelled anti-national.”
This sentiment underscores the critical need to uphold the freedom to protest — a cornerstone of any healthy democracy.
Notable International Protests
Dissent happens, especially in India as a developing country and abroad, on various issues where people are being suppressed by various means. People’s expression of interest in anything is their fundamental right.
Rights have arisen across the world in response to authoritarian governments, economic crises, corruption, and breaches of human rights. To quell opposition, particularly those with authoritarian inclinations, governments frequently use harsh crackdowns, censorship, police violence, and mass arrests.
Let us first talk about our neighbouring country, China. The Hong Kong Protests (2019–2020) were a fight against China’s tightening grip. The planned Extradition Bill, which would have allowed criminal offenders to be transferred to mainland China for prosecution, sparked the protests. Many feared this would undermine Hong Kong’s independence under the “one country, two systems” theory. The movement quickly grew, demanding the resignation of pro-Beijing politicians, universal suffrage, and an impartial investigation into police abuse. In response, the Chinese government employed:
- Brutal police force
- Mass arrests and surveillance
- Legal repression
- Censorship and media control
Iran’s Women-Led Protests (2022–Present) were sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini, 22, in police custody after being arrested by the morality police for allegedly wearing her hijab “incorrectly.” Her death ignited nationwide protests demanding women’s rights and an end to the Islamic Republic’s repressive theocratic regime. The government responded with:
- Harassment of families
- International defiance
- Mass arrests and executions
- Internet shutdowns and media blackouts
Myanmar’s Anti-Coup Protests (2021) began after the military overthrew the democratically elected government, detaining civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Millions protested for democracy and the release of political prisoners. In return, the military enforced:
- Arbitrary arrests and torture
- Criminalization of dissent
- Targeting of activists’ families
Those subject to discrimination and inequality—regardless of colour, gender, sexual orientation, identity, religion, age, disability, or socio-economic status—face even harsher repression.
Protests and Their Human Rights Impact
Governments increasingly view protests not as a right but as threats to public stability. In many countries, oppressive tactics are used to suppress demonstrations, violating rights such as freedom of speech and protection from torture. Justifications like national security or economic stability are often cited, leading to:
- Criminalization of protests
- Arbitrary detention
- Internet shutdowns
- Excessive force
Such actions aggravate grievances and erode democratic institutions. For instance, Chile’s 2019–2020 protests against inequality saw the use of pellet guns that injured hundreds. Similarly, the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests in the U.S. involved excessive police force, with Amnesty International documenting 125 such incidents.
In India, state-sponsored violence is rampant, particularly in Kashmir and the Northeast. Under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), security forces have near absolute impunity, resulting in enforced disappearances, mass detentions, and extrajudicial killings. The use of violence serves as both immediate repression and long-term deterrence. However, repression often radicalizes movements rather than suppressing them.
In Russia, laws banning “unauthorized gatherings” have jailed thousands. Over 19,000 were detained in 2021 during protests supporting Alexei Navalny. Similarly, China’s National Security Law (2020) has been used to silence dissent in Hong Kong. Even democracies like the UK and France have passed laws expanding police powers against protesters.
Arbitrary Arrests and Detentions
Mass detentions without due process are common in both authoritarian and democratic regimes. Arbitrary arrests serve to:
- Intimidate activists
- Deter public participation
- Disrupt protest leadership
In Sudan, mass arrests were used to quash the 2019 revolution. In Egypt, thousands were jailed after the 2011 Arab Spring under broad anti-terror laws. In Mexico, protest leaders have faced enforced disappearances and murder, such as the infamous case of the 43 Ayotzinapa students (2014).
Detainees often face inhuman treatment. In Belarus, torture, electric shocks, and rape were reported. Female Saudi activists who protested the driving ban were also reportedly abused. These actions violate both human rights and international legal standards, yet many states act with impunity.
International Human Rights Bodies in Countering Protest Suppression
International human rights institutions play a vital role in monitoring and challenging protest repression by promoting legal safeguards and accountability. These bodies use:
- Legal mechanisms
- Diplomatic engagement
- Public campaigns
The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly and Association regularly publishes reports highlighting violations and urging states to comply with international norms. The Rapporteur has condemned police brutality in the U.S., Hong Kong, and Sudan, advocating de-escalation over violence.
Regional bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) have taken action against governments for illegal crackdowns.
NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) document and report abuses. In Sudan, Amnesty exposed the use of rape as a weapon against female protesters. These findings have prompted calls for international intervention.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutes leaders for crimes against humanity during protest crackdowns. Additionally, economic and travel sanctions target officials responsible for these violations.
Conclusion
The increasing control over protest and criminalization of protest on an international level and in India highlights a disturbing trend towards stifling dissent rather than government and authorities supporting and understanding people’s demands.
Taking national security as a wall to defend against brutal acts, especially by force on citizens, stands nowhere in the democratic system, and we need more sustainable laws, provisions and government that support people’s choices and government that reacts positively to public opinion either internationally by concerned countries or international organizations.
Human Rights should be given priority at the utmost before any brutal act and repression by the government. We need good governance with good laws for our society.
End Notes:
- Constitution Of India, art 19(1)(a).
- Constitution Of India, art 19(1)(b).
- European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, 1953.
- Heather Whipps, How Gandhi Changed the World (How Gandhi Changed the World, 8 September 2008) https://www.livescience.com/2851-gandhi-changed-world.html accessed 24 March 2025.
- Sophie Quinton, Eight States Enact Anti-Protest Laws (Eight States Enact Anti-Protest Laws, 21 June 2021) https://stateline.org/2021/06/21/eight-states-enact-anti-protest-laws/ accessed 24 March 2025.
- Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, 2022, 2022.
- National Security Law (2020) 2020.
- UNHR, Iran: Government Continues Systematic Repression and Escalates Surveillance… (UNHR 2025) Independent Investigation https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/03/iran-government-continues-systematic-repression-and-escalates-surveillance accessed 24 March 2025.
- UNHR, Iran: Government Continues Systematic Repression… (n 8).
- Straitstimes World, France Gripped by Strikes, Protests against Pension Reform (25 November 2024) https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/france-gripped-by-strikes-protests-against-pension-reform accessed 24 March 2025.
- Aditi Agarwal, India Leads in Global Internet Shutdowns… Hindustan Times (15 May 2024) https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-leads-in-global-internet-shutdowns-for-6th-year-in-a-row-report-101715771306186.html accessed 24 March 2025.
- Constitution Of India 9.
- Amit Sahni (Shaheen Bagh, In re) v State [2020] Indian Kanoon (Supreme Court of India).
- NATASHA NARWAL v STATE OF DELHI NCT [2021] Live Law (HIGH COURT OF DELHI).
- Uday Pratap Singh Vs UOI & others [2023] Live Law (High Court of Punjab and Haryana).
- IN RE: RAMLILA MAIDAN INCIDENT (2012) Volume 4 Supreme Court Reporter (Supreme Court of India).
- Anita Thakur v State of J&K [2016] Manupatra (SC) (Supreme Court of India).
- Farmers protest The Hindu (19 December 2024) https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/farmers-protest-supreme-court-raps-punjab-govt-for-failing-to-conduct-medical-tests-of-fasting-farmer-leader/article69004110.ece accessed 24 March 2025.
- Shiv Sahay Singh, Trial in R.G. Kar Rape-Murder Case… The Hindu (12 November 2024) https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/west-bengal/trial-in-rg-kar-rape-murder-case-begins-at-kolkata-court/article68856617.ece accessed 24 March 2025.
- The Hindu, Maratha Quota (20 July 2024) https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/maharashtra/maratha-quota-manoj-jarange-patil-begins-fresh-hunger-strike/article68425361.ece accessed 24 March 2025.
- Janaki Murali, A Battle to Save Ladakh The Hindu (12 April 2024) https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a-battle-to-save-ladakh-and-all-of-humanity/article68054632.ece accessed 24 March 2025.
- Ashna Butani, Students Protest at Jantar Mantar The Hindu (28 June 2024) https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/neet-ug-row-students-protest-at-jantar-mantar-want-nta-dissolved/article68341428.ece accessed 24 March 2025.
- THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973.
- BBC, The Hong Kong Protests Explained (28 November 2019) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49317695 accessed 24 March 2025.
- UNHR, Iran: Government Continues Systematic Repression (UNHR 2025) https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/03/iran-government-continues-systematic-repression-and-escalates-surveillance accessed 24 March 2025.
- UNHR, Myanmar: Year of Brutality in Coups Wake (UNHR 2022) https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/01/28/myanmar-year-brutality-coups-wake accessed 24 March 2025.
- Chiles Protests and Prospects (5 November 2019) https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/survival-online/2019/11/chiles-protests-and-prospects/ accessed 24 March 2025.
- Berkeley Human Rights Center, Violence Against Black Lives Matter Protesters (2020) https://humanrights.berkeley.edu/projects/violence-against-black-lives-matter-protesters/. accessed 24 March 2025.
- Navalnyy v Russia [2018] European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
- BBC, Hong Kong National Security Law: What Is It and Is It Worrying? (19 March 2024) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52765838 accessed 24 March 2025.
- Ahmed Kodouda Mai Hassan, Sudans Uprising: The Fall of a Dictator (2019) Volume 30 Journal Of Democracy 89.
- Ronen Bergman Natalie Kitroeff, Why Did a Drug Gang Kill 43 Students? The New York Times (2 September 2023) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/02/world/americas/mexico-iguala-students-kidnapping.html accessed 24 March 2025.
- UNHR, UN Experts Call for End to Police Brutality Worldwide (UNHR 2021) https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2021/08/un-experts-call-end-police-brutality-worldwide-0 accessed 24 March 2025.
