Tear Gas at the Gates: When the Republic Stops Listening to Its Young

Question (10 marks, ~150 words):

"Issue-driven mobilisation by civil society remains orderly so long as the government signals that it is willing to listen." In the light of recent youth protests in Delhi, examine the constitutional limits on the state's response to peaceful assembly and suggest measures to rebuild trust between young citizens and the government.

Introduction:

• The July 20 dispersal of young protesters near Parliament — tear gas, lathis, alleged pellet injuries, an Internet shutdown and Metro closures — turned an avoidable confrontation into a test of the democratic compact between the state and its young.

Constitutional limits on the state:

• Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) protect speech and peaceful assembly; restrictions must be reasonable and proportionate (Anuradha Bhasin on Internet shutdowns; Shaheen Bagh on balancing assembly with public order).
• Force is a last resort — pellet guns and blanket shutdowns against largely peaceful crowds fail the proportionality test and punish uninvolved citizens.

Why trust broke:

• Recurring paper leaks, the NEET re-conduct and three-language friction signalled unaccountable administration of education.
• Deeper drivers — joblessness, stagnant wages, price rise — widened the discontent beyond examinations.

Rebuilding trust:

• Visible accountability for examination failures at the ministerial level; independent inquiry into the use of force.
• A standing dialogue mechanism with student and civil-society representatives; restraint protocols making shutdowns exceptional.
• Course corrections timed to public disquiet, not merely to elections.

Conclusion:

• A confident republic answers its young rather than dispersing them; engagement and accountability, not force, are the constitutional default.