By Dr. Gyan Pathak
Restrictions during polls are designed to ensure a free and fair election. Creating a level playing field among the competing candidates and parties, and keeping voters safe from intimidation is the chief aim. Certain restrictions are put in place against political parties and their candidates. However, the Ladakh administration has banned all public protests and movements in the Union Territory during the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) for the upcoming polls is in effect, which has become uniquely contentious.
The ban on protests and dharnas in Leh and Kargil ahead of the November 21 municipal panchayat polls and December 4 Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC) elections, therefore, sits directly at the intersection of election law, administrative power, and constitutional rights.
The prohibition order issued by Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of the Union Territory of Ladakh came on November 11, one day after Ladakh civil society groups announced that their agitation to push for their demands would resume on November 12. The order said that the restrictions will remain in force until the completion of the election process.
The order also stated, “The Model Code requires maintenance of an atmosphere conducive to free, fair and peaceful elections, and no activity should be permitted which may create intimidation, fear or undue influence among electors.”
On November 10, the Leh Apex Body (LAB) had called for an agitation and sit-in protest from November 12 demanding resumption of talks between the Centre and Ladakh bodies, making public the status of the judicial inquiry report into the September 24, 2025 violence that left four people dead, and the postponement of hill council elections till next year.
On November 11, members of the LAB, including co-chairman Tsering Dorjey Lakrook and activist Sonam Wangchuk, made a video appeal to President of India Draupadi Murmu, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Minister of Home Amit Shah, and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi to intervene in the matter, before the intensify their agitation.
The LAB has demanded postponement of the elections saying that these elections were being held “in spite of December and January being the coldest and snowiest months with temperatures dipping below minus 30 degree Celsius in many places and close to half the population migrates out Ladakh for education, vacation, pilgrimage etc.”
Activist Wangchuk has said, “People of Ladakh are protesting against the type of councils and manner of conduct of these elections.” He said that talks on the restoration of democracy had broken down and alleged that the administration was moving ahead with the election despite concerns raised by people across Ladakh. Even the Independent Member of Parliament from Ladakh in Lok Sabha Mohamad Haneefa has opposed the elections.
Viewed through the legal framework of the MCC, the move of banning all kinds of protests exposes a sharp tension between maintaining electoral integrity and suppressing political dissent against the election process itself.
The MCC itself is a set of guidelines for political parties and candidates, not a standalone law that bans citizen protests. To legally enforce a blanket ban on all organizations and individuals, Ladakh’s Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) invoked statutory local provisions—specifically Section 282 of the Jammu and Kashmir Municipal Act, 2000, read with the J&K Municipal Committee (Election) Rules, 2003—alongside the MCC.
The administration’s order explicitly bars not just political parties, but “any other individual or organisation” from activities that could “intimidate, coerce or unduly influence the electors” or disturb public order. Under Indian election law, calling for an election boycott or staging protests against the conduct of polls can be interpreted by authorities as “undue influence” or obstruction of the electoral process.
Nevertheless, such an interpretation can’t be accepted, because there is no blanket law or provision in India that completely prohibits peaceful protests and agitations solely because the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) is in operation. The right to peaceful assembly remains protected under Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of India.
No doubt, protests and agitations during an election period are heavily regulated through a combination of the MCC guidelines (which apply to political parties and candidates) and existing statutory laws (which apply to all citizens and groups) to maintain public order and ensure free and fair elections.
Provisions under MCC, that applies to political parties and candidates, is itself not a statutory law and it is enforced under Article 324 of the Constitution of India. It mandates that organisers must inform local police well in advance of the venue, time, and route of any meeting or procession so that authorities can make traffic and security arrangements. Political parties and candidates are explicitly barred from carrying or burning effigies representing members or leaders of other political parties in public. One party cannot take out a procession along places where another party is holding a meeting, nor can they create disturbances at rival gatherings. Peaceful demonstrations or picketing before the houses of individuals to protest their political opinions or activities are prohibited under any circumstances.
The current protest in Ladakh has nothing to do with any political party, but has to do with the election and its process itself, which they are opposing, saying that conducting election at a time when a quarter of the population migrates out of the region will effectively disenfranchise them. They are not even satisfied with the recent delimitation exercise. There is a catch-22 situation now. People have right to demand fairness of the election, and after election, the protest itself will lose its meaning. (IPA Service)
