Dr. B. R. Ambedkar had cautioned that employing civil disobedience within a constitutional democracy equates to endorsing ‘anarchy’. How should modern democracies navigate the ethical dilemmas posed by civil disobedience movements that aim to promote social justice against policies that may raise genuine concerns? (Answer in 150 words)

- Dr. B. R. Ambedkar had cautioned that employing civil disobedience within a constitutional democracy equates to endorsing ‘anarchy’. How should modern democracies navigate the ethical dilemmas posed by civil disobedience movements that aim to promote social justice against policies that may raise genuine concerns? (Answer in 150 words)
Introduction
Ambedkar warned that once constitutional methods become available, routine resort to civil disobedience risks weakening democratic institutions. Yet, morally serious dissent may still arise when laws or policies perpetuate injustice.
Body
Ethical Dilemma:
1. Rule of Law vs Conscience: Citizens must respect lawful institutions, but obedience cannot be absolute when policies violate dignity, equality or justice.
2. Democratic Legitimacy: Elected governments require space to govern; continuous disruption may undermine representative democracy.
3. Voice of the Marginalised: Civil disobedience can expose grievances ignored by majoritarian politics or inaccessible institutions.
4. Proportionality: Protest should remain peaceful, non-violent and targeted, causing minimum harm to uninvolved citizens.
5. Last Resort: Constitutional remedies—courts, legislatures, consultations and elections—should ordinarily be exhausted first.
6. Accountability: Protesters should accept legal consequences, while the State must avoid disproportionate repression.
Conclusion
Thus, modern democracies should neither romanticise nor criminalise civil disobedience; they should permit principled dissent while preserving constitutionalism, dialogue, proportionality and public order.