New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday said that a mediation team should talk to the protesters in Shaheen Bagh, the road has been blocked. The team will be headed by senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, who was to appear in court to hear the case.
Justice S. K. Kaul and K.M. Joseph was hearing the plea of lawyer Amit Sahni and Bharatiya Janata Party leader Nand Kishore Garg, who wanted the road to be opened and the protest be resolved. The demonstration led by Muslim women has been going on for more than two months in Shaheen Bagh.
The protestors want the Citizenship (Amendment) Act to be repealed and the National Register of Citizens and the National Population Law be repealed.
While people have the right to protest, the bench said, the road blockade cannot go on indefinitely and the venue of protest can be changed. Justice Kaul said that according to LiveLive, there needs to be a “balance” in the right to protest.
“Democracy works on the expression of ideas. But there are lines and boundaries. If you want to protest while the talk is being heard here, that is also fine. But our concern is limited. Today there can be only one legislation.
Tomorrow another section of the society may have some other problem. Traffic blocking and inconvenience are our concerns. My concern is that if everyone starts blocking the roads, it is probably due to real concerns where it stops, ”said Justice Kaul.
The bench said that Hegde may choose two others to join the arbitration team. He suggested advocate Sadhana Ramachandran and former Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah, who has filed an application intervening in the case.
The Solicitor General told the court that “there was a complete blockade” and that “the entire city was being held hostage”. When an interventionist’s lawyer said that school buses, ambulances, etc. were being allowed to pass, he disagreed.
“We want you to see them as an alternative rather than blocking the streets for protest,” Justice told SG.
However, SG said that it should not appear that the court is agreeing to the demands of the protesters. “I don’t want the message to come in our hands,” he said. “This is to discuss and then inform them.
We would suggest, but it cannot be their contention that since we have not been able to find an alternative, they will continue there. ‘
The next hearing of the case will be on 24 February. The bench had previously stated verbally that protests cannot go on indefinitely and they should be restricted to “designated areas for protest”.