The Preamble to the Constitution of India promises liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. Clauses (a) to (c) of Article 19(1) promise: Freedom of speech and expression; Freedom to assemble peaceably and without arms; And the freedom to form associations or unions. These three freedoms are vehicles through which dissent can be expressed. The right of freedom of opinion and the right of freedom of conscience by themselves include the extremely important right to disagree.
Dissent is essential in a democracy. If a country has to grow in a holistic manner where not only the economic rights but also the civil rights of the citizen are to be protected, dissent and disagreement have to be permitted, and in fact, should be encouraged. It is only if there is discussion, disagreement and dialogue that we can arrive at better ways to run the country. There can be no democracy without dissent. Recently, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud in his speech put the matter very succinctly: “The blanket labelling of dissent as anti-national or anti-democratic strikes at the heart of our commitment to protect constitutional values and the promotion of deliberative democracy.”
Further, as was observed by Hon’ble Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge, Supreme Court of India, the very essence of democracy is that every citizen has a right to participate not only in the electoral process but also in the way in which our country is run. This right becomes meaningless if that person cannot criticise the actions of the Government. The citizen, is not only a participant in the democratic process, he is an integral part of the country and has a right to express his views even if they are totally contrary to the views of those in power. No doubt, these views must be expressed in a peaceful manner but citizens have a right to get together and protest when they feel the actions taken by the Government are not proper. Their cause may not always be right. At the same time, the Government may also not be right. The Government has no right to stifle or quell protest as long as the protestors are peaceful. Protest also means expressing dissent which is part of the legacy left by the father of the country in the form of Civil Disobedience Movement, following the path of Ahimsa.
That is why dissent plays an important role in the decision-making process. A dissenting judgement sows the seed, which develops a new thought, which may at a later stage develop into a totally new approach to the law.
The right to dissent includes the right to criticise. Not only should there be criticism but there must be introspection. When we introspect, we will find that many decisions taken by us need to be corrected. Criticism of the executive, judiciary, the bureaucracy or the Armed Forces cannot be termed ‘anti-national’. In case we attempt to stifle criticism of the institutions whether it be the legislature, the executive or the judiciary or other bodies of the State, we shall become a police State instead of a democracy and this the founding fathers never expected this country to be.
