The Right to Dissent in the Socio-legal Context: Reimagining Citizenship, Strengthening Democracy
Shalu Nigam · 2024
‘Let’s agree to disagree’ may sum up the gist of the word ‘dissent’ in simple terms. Dissent generally, implies disagreement, criticism, questioning, or protest against the coercive decision or unjust laws and policies imposed by a person/s in authority. Explored constructively, peaceful and nonviolent dissent may lead to dialogue, open discussions, entrenchment of democratic ideas, undoing injustices, and ending oppression. Collective disobedience often results in a constructive social transformation.However, history depicts that authoritarian rulers have used tools such as the law and violence to suppress dissent, and this repression of diverse voices by authoritarian states continues during modern times. Dissent is being construed detrimentally as disobedience, and dissenters are perceived as a threat to the law-and-order situation by the authoritarian states. Frequently, the dissent is criminalized while the law is weaponized against the dissenters by those in power. Social, legal, and economic sanctions are imposed on those who disobey, criticize or resist the authority.So, why those in power are hostile to the idea of dissent? Why the tyrannical leaders delegitimize political mobilization or are endangered the expression of free speech? Why are those dissenting or criticizing the state’s actions perceived as traitors or enemies of the state? Instead of constructively accepting positive criticism, why do the authoritarian states construe it as a threat to the nation’s security and integrity? This work dismantles the concept of dissent and unpacks how it has been construed in legal and political terms in India.