Should Political Rallies Take Precedence Over People’s Right to Movement?

Chennai:As Assembly elections draw closer, political rallies around the state are picking up pace. Parties with their ministers and people’s representatives are increasingly mobilising supporters with roadshows, rallies and street meetings. But along with that surge, serious friction has emerged between their methods for public function, the law and everyday life of ordinary citizens.

On Sunday, ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) occupied about a 500 m portion of Anna Main Road, one of the busy arterial roads in the city, to distribute welfare schemes of the government to the people. Health minister Ma. Subramanian participated in the programme organised by local councillor K. Dhanasekaran.

In mid-June last year in Tiruchy, a large rally by the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) brought much of the city to a virtual standstill when it was allowed to proceed along major arterial roads. Thousands of people and vehicles were involved, and what was intended to be a vibrant political demonstration turned into hours of gridlock, with buses delayed, commuters stranded and even emergency vehicles struggling to get through.

Residents criticised the party and the authorities for permitting such an event on busy city streets, asking why rallies couldn’t be shifted to open grounds and designated venues where they would not interfere with public movement.

Beyond just traffic frustration, safety concerns have also entered the legal conversation. Last year, a stampede broke out at a political rally in Karur organised by the Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam (TVK), killing 41 people and injuring many others. That tragedy set off a cascade of judicial scrutiny and administrative action. The Madras high court formed a special investigation team to look into the incident and, as a precautionary measure, prohibited major political events on state and national highways until standard operating procedures (SOPs) for mass gatherings could be established.

The court also directed the state government to draft comprehensive rules for rallies, including crowd control and public safety measures.

In response to the high court’s directions, the Tamil Nadu government drafted SOPs that will require parties planning roadshows and large processions to seek permission from police and local authorities, provide details of crowd strength and safety arrangements, and potentially pay refundable security deposits tied to the estimated size of the gathering.

Even as the authorities work to balance safety with political freedom, there have been instances where permission for rallies has been formally denied. In October 2025, police in Namakkal refused approval for a series of campaign rallies planned by the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) leader Edappadi K. Palaniswami, citing public safety concerns and the existing high court directive prohibiting meetings on national highways.

The officials suggested that the party choose private land for public meetings instead of staging them on public highways where they could disrupt traffic and endanger road-users. Similarly, when the TVK sought to hold a long road rally in nearby Puducherry, the authorities there permitted an open-air meeting but refused to allow the planned processional element, again pointing to law and order considerations.

Ajay Francis, an advocate in the Madras high court, who fights against such issues in court, said the Constitution has guaranteed the right to peacefully assemble and protest, and political speech is central to the democratic process. But that right is not absolute. Political parties occupying public roads to conduct public functions is a violation of citizens’ fundamental right to freedom and movement. Citizens pay taxes to the government. This attitude of political parties, especially ruling parties, is deplorable.

The police and administrative authorities have the statutory power to regulate public gatherings where they may threaten public order, safety or impede free movement of the public in general.

In Tamil Nadu, high court rulings and pending SOPs reflect a judicial and administrative consensus that political activities must be balanced with public convenience and safety. The courts have reminded parties that the freedom to protest or campaign “does not give a licence to block public roads or footpaths” without proper control and permission. The SOPs for processions and meetings must consistently be enforced, he said.

Many residents found it intolerable as rallies block main roads at peak hours, leaving thousands stranded and interfering with every day activities. In Tiruchy, road safety activists argued that large processions should not be allowed at sensitive sites such as leader statues as symbolic spaces that are meant for respect, not political stages. However, they say that proper traffic diversion plans are essential.

At the same time, some party activists contend that political mobilisation sometimes requires visibility in public spaces, and that restrictive rules could stifle democratic engagement.

“We conduct such events in the areas where the party has a strong presence. We used to get feedback from the local residents before conducting such a function. If anybody objects, we will change the location,” says a political party functionary.

N. Viswanathan, an advocate and activist in Nesapakkam, said the police were expected to play a key role in enforcing the SOPs and monitoring poll-related activities, including rallies and public meetings, to ensure compliance with legal norms.

Some parties, including the TVK, however, have moved the Madras high court, challenging the recently notified rules on grounds that they unfairly prioritise certain recognised parties or impose impractical compliance burdens.

A police official said that they used to approve political rallies with strict conditions. We don’t provide permission to the political parties to block main roads and conduct functions on roads. If we deny the permission, some local politicians, especially from the ruling parties, get approval from the senior officials using their clout, said a police official.

What is clear from the legal and public discourse in Tamil Nadu is that while political parties have the right to hold rallies and meetings as part of their democratic campaign, those activities must not be allowed to disrupt public life, impede traffic, or threaten safety.

The authorities, courts, political actors and citizens alike are now negotiating a fine balance between preserving democratic freedoms and protecting public welfare in the vibrant, high-stakes environment of an election year.