Sonam Wangchuk's Hunger Strike: Legal Implications and Government Response

Day 19 of Sonam Wangchuk's Hunger Strike

Today marks the 19th day of Sonam Wangchuk's hunger strike. Recently, a public interest petition was filed in the Delhi High Court, urging the government to intervene immediately to save Wangchuk's life. The petition requested that he be hospitalized without delay and, if necessary, force-fed to ensure his survival. It also called for the government to engage in dialogue with Wangchuk. The High Court instructed the central government to provide any necessary medical assistance to protect Wangchuk's life. The bench, led by Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyay and Justice Tejas Karia, emphasized the value of life and mandated regular health check-ups by government doctors. Wangchuk has been on this hunger strike since June 28, and his supporters are increasingly concerned about his deteriorating health, warning that his life is at risk. This situation has reignited discussions about the legality of hunger strikes in India, particularly during high-profile protests.

Is Hunger Strike Illegal?

No, there is no law in India that prohibits an individual from undertaking a hunger strike. The Constitution grants citizens the right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b). Therefore, peaceful protests, including sit-ins and symbolic fasts, are generally constitutionally protected activities. However, these rights are not absolute. The government can impose reasonable restrictions based on public order, security, morality, or other grounds specified in Article 19.

Are Hunger Strikes and Fasts Different?

Legally, yes. While initiating a hunger strike is not a criminal offense, authorities intervene when it poses a serious threat to the protester's life. Under Article 21, the government has a constitutional duty to protect the right to life. Courts have consistently ruled that if someone's life is in imminent danger, the state cannot remain a bystander. This is why officials often monitor the health of hunger strikers and may transfer them to hospitals or initiate treatment if their condition becomes critical.

Can the Government Force-Feed a Hunger Striker?

There is no specific law that explicitly allows for the force-feeding of every hunger striker. Typically, authorities rely on medical advice, counseling, and persuasion first. If a court orders medical intervention or doctors believe the individual's life is in immediate danger, they may be hospitalized for treatment. Courts generally strive to balance an individual's freedom with the government's responsibility to preserve life. In Wangchuk's case, the Delhi High Court has not ordered force-feeding but has directed officials to conduct daily health check-ups and provide medical assistance as needed. The central government informed the court that government doctors are already monitoring his condition.

Can Police Stop a Hunger Strike?

In certain circumstances, police can intervene. If a protest violates prohibitory orders, disrupts public order, blocks public spaces, or lacks necessary permits, police may impose restrictions. Authorities have previously detained hunger strikers or removed them from protest sites citing public order or health concerns. However, such actions are usually justified for reasons unrelated to the fasting itself.

What Have the Courts Said?

Indian courts have generally recognized peaceful protests as a democratic right while emphasizing that ensuring the safety of individuals is the government's responsibility. During the hearing of Wangchuk's case, the Delhi High Court stated that "life is precious" and instructed both the central and Delhi governments to keep a close watch on his health, ensuring appropriate medical assistance is provided when necessary.

Has India Seen Major Hunger Strikes Before?

Yes, hunger strikes have a long history in India's political movements. Mahatma Gandhi utilized fasting as a form of nonviolent resistance during the freedom struggle. In independent India, prominent figures like Anna Hazare and Irom Sharmila have resorted to indefinite fasts to press their demands. While governments often initially permit such protests, they have intervened through arrests, hospitalizations, or medical monitoring when health deteriorates. Currently, Wangchuk is on an indefinite hunger strike at Jantar Mantar, demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over the NEET paper leak issue and advocating for broader educational reforms. His doctors have reported a weight loss of over 9 kilograms, raising concerns about potential organ damage if the fasting continues. Nevertheless, Wangchuk remains resolute, stating that ending his fast without a government response would send the wrong message. In a video message shared on X, he expressed that halting the protest now would imply that there is no need to hold governments accountable.

A New Anna Movement?

Many may recall the duo of Arvind Kejriwal and Anna Hazare from 2011. There are parallels being drawn, suggesting that this could be a repeat of the Anna movement. Just as Kejriwal leveraged Hazare's anti-corruption movement for his political ambitions, some speculate that Abhijit Deepke might be using Sonam Wangchuk similarly. It is worth noting that Hazare's India Against Corruption movement was initially non-political. Kejriwal had claimed he would never enter politics, yet he later became the Chief Minister of Delhi, seemingly forgetting Hazare's ideals. Until recently, Deepke insisted he wanted no part in politics and sought to keep political leaders away from the protest. However, he has since changed his stance, actively engaging with political figures and inviting them to join the protest at Jantar Mantar.