Latest update April 18th, 2024 12:59 AM
Jul 28, 2009 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom
The right to demonstrate carries with it the right to determine the place and hour during which such a demonstration should take place. However, as with all human rights, the right to demonstrate is not absolute.
Those who therefore raise absurd arguments about “holy rights” and “holy ground” need to appreciate that while the State should not infringe on the constitutional right to protest, this constitutional right does not in fact give a protestor the right to demonstrate wherever and however he or she feels.
The right to demonstrate falls under a group of rights known as the right to freedom of association of which the right to assembly is just one protected right.
However, this right does not give anyone the right to assemble for any purpose. The right to protest is conditioned by the understanding that this right will be exercised in a peaceful manner. Thus, an assembly for any other purpose than peaceful action is not protected under freedom of assembly.
More importantly, freedom of association, as with all rights, cannot conflict with other individual rights and also with certain public interests. Thus, while persons have the right to protest and demonstrate, this right must be exercised with regards to the rights of others and done in a manner that does not conflict with public interests.
A demonstration therefore must not infringe on the rights of others and must take into consideration wider public interests such as public security and safety. In some countries, there are, for example, prohibitions, on protests outside of embassies. While there may not be sacred ground, there are grounds limiting where protests may be undertaken.
During the hosting of the Rio Summit, persons sympathetic to the Stabroek News hosted a protest demonstration outside of the event but were not allowed to go beyond the barriers, something that they felt was unfair. It was not in fact.
In most international conferences, protestors are kept a fair distance away from the actual doors of the event. In most instances entire blocks are sealed off to keep protestors at bay. During last April’s Summit of the Americas, for example, the entire capital was sealed off and no protestors were allowed anywhere near the hotel where the dignitaries were staying as this would have compromised security.
These restrictions were never challenged as infringing on freedom of assembly.
In the case of the protests outside of the Office of the Commissioner of Police, the police have indicated security concerns. This is something that has to be carefully considered. There is nothing unusual about the police asking protestors to demonstrate outside of certain perimeters. What must also be borne in mind is that according to the police, there was some event taking place inside the Officers’ Mess.
The police may have some justification in restricting protests on security grounds. The police must be assured freedom of ingress and egress to their headquarters. The police have a role in responding to crimes and other incidents and thus given this public service role should be unhindered in entering and exiting a police station.
This may be a ground on which to restrict protests just outside of police headquarters, more especially when one considers that the said headquarters and other police stations also have suffered attacks in the past. With the Commissioner’s Office being extremely close to the fence and roadway, security concerns must be uppermost.
It is reassuring that the Commissioner of Police has indicated that there is no denial of the right to protest. This is a positive statement and something that shows sensitivity towards respecting the civil liberties of citizens.
The Police cannot expect to be free of protests. They are public agency and thus subject to criticism and this criticism can take the form of protests demonstration. At the same time, given what has happened in Guyana in the past, there must be some regard while asserting constitutionally guaranteed rights, to respect that these are conditional and must especially be done without infringing on the rights of others and on public interests concerns.
It is worth reminding that while freedom of expression does not give anyone the right to shout “ Fire!” in a crowded cinema, so too does freedom of association or assembly not give anyone an absolute right to protest without due regard to the interests of others.
JAGDEO ADDING MORE DANGER TO GUYANA AND THE REGION
Apr 18, 2024
SportsMax – West Indies captain Hayley Matthews has been named Wisden’s leading Twenty20 Cricketer for 2023, as she topped all and sundry, including her male counterparts. Alan Gardner looks...Kaieteur News – Compliments of the Ministry of Education, our secondary school children are being treated to a stage... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]