Daily Analysis

An in-depth analysis of the best and most relevant editorials of the day from the best dailies known for civil services preparation.

RSTV – THE BIG PICTURE ANALYSIS

Public Shaming, Article 21 and Privacy

The Topic covers GS paper 2[Indian Constitution- historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure.]

Image result for Public Shaming INDIA

 

Context

  • The Supreme Court told the Uttar Pradesh government that there was “no law” that backed its action of putting up pictures, along with personal details, on roadsides of those accused of vandalism during anti-CAA protests in Lucknow. 

  • The top court referred the matter to a larger three-judge bench on the ground that it required “further elaboration and consideration” on whether the fundamental right to privacy of the alleged protesters could be waived by the state by “castigating them for all times” to come. 


What is the background?


  • The Yogi Adityanath government had appealed in the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court order. 

  • The BJP dispensation has ordered the 57 accused persons to pay fines for the damage allegedly caused to public and private property during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act or be prepared for their properties to be attached. 


What are the highlights of the judgement?


  • The top court, however, said it understood the “anxiety” of the state government and there was “no doubt” that rioters should be punished and told to compensate for the damage caused. 

  • It said that though there was no doubt that there should not be any kind of vandalism and that the accused should be booked, the question was “can the state go two stages beyond that” and decide to name and shame the protesters. 

  • The court that once a person decides to put himself in the public domain, like by wielding a gun, he can no longer say that he has the right to privacy and the media should be restrained from publicising him. 

  • It said there was a difference between the rights of an individual and those of the state, which must be backed by law. 


Conclusion

  • While ordering the removal of the posters, Allahabad High Court had directed the district magistrate and the Lucknow police commissioner to submit a compliance report on or before March 16. 

  • Besides IPS officer Darapuri, activist-politician Sadaf Jafar is among those whose names and photos have been put up.