Introduction<\/b><\/p>\n
The most notable anti-governmental protests have sparked across the streets of \u201cEurope’s Last Dictatorship\u201d as Belarusian citizens have been peacefully demonstrating against the allegedly manipulated August 2020 Presidential elections, rampant police brutality and the inhuman treatment meted out to the detainees by the State machinery. These protests have become one amongst many amplifying demonstrations that various establishments across the world are grappling with along side the constant threat of the coronavirus pandemic. The right to protest is the expression of the protester of showing dissent against the authority.<\/p>\n
The United Nations Human Rights Committee, coincidentally at a propitious time, adopted General Comment No. 37 on Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights1<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0(hereinafter, \u201cIccpr\u201d) that enshrines the right to peaceful assembly. The general comment reinstated the responsibility of law enforcement State agencies to protect and enable these peaceful demonstrations2<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0and the non-usage of \u201cindiscriminate use of firearms\u201d except a minimal force to curb an escalated tension3<\/a><\/sup>. The UN Committee has thus held the right to protest, whether offline or online, as a vital human right4<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0well protected by the principles of international law, particularly the\u00a0Iccpr\u00a0and various other regional human rights conventions.<\/p>\n This article attempts to provide a comparative analysis with respect to the legal principle of the right to protest in two distinctive jurisdictions, India and Belarus as analogous agitations against the ruling dispensation have been observed in both the countries.<\/p>\nTo read the full text of the article, click here<\/a>.<\/span><\/h3>\n
\n