JeetoBharat
All current affairs

Balancing Fundamental Rights: Reconciling Protest Zones with Informal Livelihoods

GS2GS3

The Supreme Court has highlighted the emergence of a 'protest economy,' prompting a judicial review of how the right to protest intersects with the socio-economic rights of informal street vendors.

The Supreme Court’s recent observations regarding the intersection of public protest sites and informal economies underscore a critical tension in urban governance. As civil society movements frequently occupy designated public spaces, a localized 'protest economy' often develops, comprising hawkers, street vendors, and daily wagers who rely on the footfall of protesters and security personnel for their subsistence. The Bench has rightly pointed out that in the exercise of the constitutionally protected right to peaceful assembly, the state and the judiciary must adopt a nuanced approach to prevent the collateral disenfranchisement of vulnerable workers.

From a policy perspective, this raises the challenge of reconciling two distinct constitutional imperatives. On one hand, Article 19(1)(b) grants the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, subject to reasonable restrictions. On the other hand, the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, seeks to protect the livelihood rights of the informal sector. When protests lead to the closure of areas or the displacement of vendors, the state’s duty to ensure a 'level playing field' for these individuals becomes paramount.

For urban administrators, the focus must shift from purely securitized approaches—which often view protest sites solely through a law-and-order prism—to a more holistic 'rights-based' management. This includes creating designated vending zones that remain functional during protests or providing temporary relocation support. By recognizing the informal economy as an intrinsic part of the city's social fabric, rather than an encroachment, the administration can uphold the dignity and livelihood security of the most marginalized populations. This judicial discourse serves as a reminder that constitutional rights do not exist in silos; the right to protest should not inadvertently trample upon the right to earn a dignified living, especially for those operating on the margins of the formal economy.

Continue reading — free with login

JeetoBharat publishes daily UPSC current affairs mapped to the Mains syllabus. Log in to read full articles.

Log in to read full article

No credit card required. Free registered users get unlimited access.

This article was curated using AI. While we strive for accuracy, please verify critical facts from official sources.

More UPSC Current Affairs

View month archive →