Tihi prosvjedi koštaju demokraciju

The Indian government's decision to remove Jantar Mantar in Delhi as a designated protest site has sparked debate over the implications for democratic expression. According to historical analysis, Jantar Mantar, known for its wide avenues and open spaces, may not have been ideal for sustained protests due to its layout and accessibility. This perspective draws from the writings of historian Eric Hobsbawm, who discussed the suitability of cities for spontaneous protests. He noted that modern cities like New Delhi, with structured layouts and controlled environments, are less conducive to prolonged unrest compared to older, more organic urban settings. Hobsbawm argued that the effectiveness of protests hinges on three factors: the ease of mobilizing the poor, the vulnerability of centers of authority, and the difficulty of suppression. In this regard, Delhi appears to score poorly. Its design allows for easy containment of crowds, making it challenging for protesters to maintain momentum. In contrast, locations like Shaheen Bagh, where the 2020 protest took place, offered geographical advantages that complicated efforts to disperse demonstrators. The removal of Jantar Mantar as a protest site has raised concerns among advocates of free expression. The site has historically been a hub for diverse movements addressing issues ranging from gender rights to anti-corruption campaigns. Its designation as a protest spot aligned with constitutional guarantees under Article 19, ensuring the right to speech and expression. Critics argue that shifting protests to locations such as Ramlila Maidan, Burari Ground, and CBD Ground diminishes their impact. These alternatives are farther from the city center, often occupied by commercial or religious activities, and not always available for extended periods. The move comes amid legal scrutiny, with the Supreme Court issuing notices regarding the de-notification of Jantar Mantar. Delhi Police cited a Supreme Court order as justification, while the central government stated it had formed a committee to suggest alternative venues. The handling of recent protests, including those related to examination reforms and the CEC, highlights tensions between maintaining public order and upholding democratic principles. Protesters emphasize that the visibility and proximity to power are crucial for holding authorities accountable. They argue that democratic processes, though sometimes disruptive, are essential for expressing dissent. The shift in protest locations may affect the ability of citizens to engage directly with the political landscape, potentially altering the dynamics of public discourse and civic engagement.