Critics of the move to restrict protests at Jantar Mantar warn that such measures threaten the fundamental democratic right to dissent. By pushing demonstrations to the periphery of the city, the government risks rendering these protests invisible and ineffective. The central location of Jantar Mantar is essential for activists because it ensures that their message reaches the corridors of power and the public eye, which is the primary goal of any peaceful demonstration.
Many civil society groups argue that the government's focus on 'suitability' is a thinly veiled attempt to curb political opposition and minimize the visibility of public grievances. They contend that the inconvenience caused by protests is a small price to pay for a healthy democracy. If the state is allowed to dictate where and when citizens can gather, it sets a dangerous precedent that could be used to systematically isolate and silence marginalized voices that rely on public visibility to gain traction for their causes.
Furthermore, critics highlight that the right to assemble is a cornerstone of the Indian Constitution. They argue that instead of seeking to relocate protesters, the government should focus on improving the management of the existing site to accommodate both the public and the demonstrators. By investing in better crowd control and sanitation, the authorities could resolve the logistical issues without infringing upon the democratic character of the city. The focus should remain on protecting the space for public discourse rather than clearing it for the sake of administrative convenience.