The Hindu Gist - 12th October, 2026
1 . Rights and Wrongs: The Government Must Not Clamp Down on Dissent and Protest
The Constitution guarantees every citizen the fundamental right to peaceful assembly and protest, irrespective of gender, caste or status. However, police action against protesters in Delhi—including detentions, cancellation of travel arrangements and alleged assaults on activists, academics, journalists and lawyers—raises concerns over the curtailment of civil liberties and shrinking space for dissent. The reported use of force against women protesters, despite video evidence, further highlights concerns about police accountability.
The Supreme Court, while hearing a challenge to a proposed ban on travel or assembly, acknowledged the urgency of the issue. However, repeated judicial interventions have not necessarily restrained the government’s approach towards critics, including the branding of dissenters as anti-national. The controversy surrounding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar further raises questions about the use of political power to defend institutional actions. The government must uphold constitutional rules, protect peaceful dissent and remain accountable to citizens rather than misuse state power against them.
2. Message of Peace: The Nobel Committee Has Redeemed Itself by Awarding the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize to Navi Pillay
The 2026 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to South African jurist Navi Pillay seeks to restore the credibility of the Nobel Committee amid criticism of its earlier decisions. Pillay’s work has strengthened international criminal law through her roles at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), as well as her leadership of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. In the Rwanda Tribunal, she contributed to the landmark recognition of rape as a means of perpetrating genocide, establishing an important precedent in international criminal law. Her career reflects a sustained commitment to accountability for war crimes and sexual violence.
Pillay’s recognition comes amid growing challenges to international law, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Israel’s continued operations in Gaza and the US military intervention in Venezuela illustrate concerns over violations of international norms and the weakening of multilateral institutions. The Nobel Committee’s message is that the fight to strengthen international law and the institutions that uphold it is essential to a more peaceful and accountable world.
3. The Gaps in the Implementation of the RTI Act
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, requires public authorities to proactively disclose information under Section 4(1)(b). However, inadequate suo motu disclosure and weak compliance with transparency audits continue to undermine the Act’s objective of reducing the need for citizens to file RTI applications.
Gaps in Proactive Disclosure
- Mandatory disclosure: Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act specifies the categories of information that public authorities must disclose suo motu. Additional proactive-disclosure guidelines also cover matters such as public-private partnerships, procurement and information on RTI applications received.
- Incomplete audit coverage: Of 2,303 public authorities registered with the Central Information Commission (CIC), only 1,446 (62.7%) submitted third-party audit reports. Around half of these reports scored Grade C or below, indicating compliance below 80%.
- Poor website transparency: Among 94 government department websites examined, only 33 had reportable section-wise scores and compliance classifications. Seven had outdated audit reports, 43 had no report, seven lacked complete audit details, three lacked complete reference or scoring information, and one did not display its report.
- Limited assessment scope: The assessment covered departments under the Central Government’s online RTI filing portal; therefore, its findings do not represent every public authority in the country.
- Formal versus meaningful disclosure: Merely uploading incomplete, outdated or inadequate information does not fulfil the objective of proactive disclosure. Citizens need accessible, complete and updated information.
Implications for Transparency and Accountability
- Continued dependence on applications: The persistence of RTI applications, alongside the accumulation of pending appeals and complaints before information commissions, highlights the importance of effective proactive disclosure.
- Administrative burden: Weak implementation of Section 4 increases the effort required by citizens to obtain routine information and places additional demands on public authorities and information commissions.
- Strengthen compliance: Public authorities must publish complete and updated information across all 16 categories, conduct regular third-party audits and make audit findings publicly accessible.
- Institutional monitoring: The CIC and State Information Commissions must strengthen monitoring of disclosure practices and ensure that transparency audits lead to actual improvements.
Effective implementation of Section 4 should make information routinely accessible without requiring citizens to file individual RTI applications, strengthening transparency and administrative accountability.
4 . Why UAPA Demands Urgent Reform
The prolonged incarceration of Professor G.N. Saibaba highlights how vague provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), stringent bail conditions and inconsistent judicial interpretation can undermine civil liberties, due process and the rule of law.
Prolonged Incarceration and Due Process
- N. Saibaba’s case: The 90% disabled former Delhi University professor was arrested in 2014 under UAPA over alleged links with Maoists, convicted in 2017 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Bombay High Court acquitted him in 2022, but the Supreme Court intervened; he was ultimately acquitted in 2024.
- Human cost of detention: Saibaba spent nearly a decade in prison, during which his health deteriorated. His case highlights the consequences of prolonged incarceration, particularly for persons with serious disabilities.
- Bhima Koregaon case: Sixteen scholars and activists were arrested in 2018. Years later, the trial had still not begun, illustrating how accused persons can remain imprisoned without a judicial determination of guilt.
- Other cases: Father Stan Swamy died in custody in 2021. Several other accused secured bail only after spending years in prison, raising concerns about timely justice and humane treatment.
Vague Provisions and Judicial Inconsistency
- Ambiguous membership: UAPA provisions concerning membership of unlawful organisations have raised questions about whether alleged association alone is sufficient for prosecution or whether evidence of active involvement in unlawful activities is necessary.
- Inconsistent interpretation: Courts have differed in interpreting the meaning of membership and the conduct required to establish an offence, creating uncertainty in the application of the law.
- Restrictive bail: Stringent bail conditions make release difficult even when proceedings are substantially delayed, increasing the risk that detention becomes punishment before conviction.
- Presumption of innocence: Prolonged incarceration without trial weakens due process, particularly when the accused cannot secure bail and the evidence has yet to be fully tested.
Need for Legal and Procedural Reform
- Judicial discretion: Courts must assess the evidence and the legal basis for detention rather than treating allegations or organisational links as sufficient grounds for prolonged incarceration.
- Proportionality: Restrictions imposed in the name of national security must be proportionate and consistent with constitutional protections.
- Timely trials: Delays in commencing and completing trials undermine the fairness of proceedings, particularly when stringent bail provisions keep accused persons in custody.
- Legal clarity: Clearer definitions of unlawful membership and terrorist activity, consistent judicial standards and effective safeguards against arbitrary detention are necessary.
- Balancing security and liberty: Counter-terrorism legislation must protect national security without weakening civil liberties, due process and judicial accountability.
