I understand that courts must hear both sides. Allegations must be examined, not treated as established facts. But there is a difference between being fair to the State and allowing the State all the time it needs while citizens bear the consequences. What does it take for a court to intervene with urgency? How many videos of young people being beaten, journalists allegedly assaulted and women alleging harassment must circulate before the Court recognises the need for immediate protection and accountability? The Court has taken some steps, including considering an all-women panel to examine allegations concerning women journalists. That is welcome. But notices and directions are only the beginning. What matters is whether they translate into protection, credible investigations and accountability. The Supreme Court is not expected to run the government. It is expected to ensure that the government stays within the Constitution. The Court reportedly remarked that the institution was making a mockery of itself. Indeed, milords. But the concern extends beyond the conduct of the Bar in a heated courtroom. If senior advocates must repeatedly knock on the Court's doors to draw attention to what is happening outside, and the Bench cannot provide meaningful, timely relief, both must reflect on what this says about our institutions. If even the most senior members of the Bar have to fight this hard to get the State to answer, what hope does an ordinary citizen have? The State cannot act first, offer explanations later and get away with the consequences in the meantime. If the Supreme Court cannot be the place where citizens seek protection against the excesses of the State, where do they go? This is not merely a failure of the State. It is a commentary on the Bar, the Bench and, ultimately, our democracy. (2/2)

Do the judges of the Supreme Court live under a rock? Do they not know what is happening in Delhi? Do they need to be convinced, petition after petition, that something is terribly wrong? Section 163 across large parts of central Delhi. 221 companies of paramilitary forces deployed. 45 metro stations with entry/exit restrictions. 75 trains cancelled. Students detained, journalists and lawyers allegedly beaten, women protesters alleging molestation, opposition MPs detained. All of this in the national capital, in full public view, with videos and accounts circulating everywhere. The Supreme Court was approached repeatedly by some of the senior-most advocates in the country. There were orders, notices and allegations of contempt. And yet the State carried on. The State's defence? Only 45 of 303 metro stations were affected. Train services continued. As though the question was whether Delhi's Metro had come to a complete standstill, rather than whether extraordinary restrictions on people's movement and right to protest were justified. This is what constitutional accountability has been reduced to: percentages, technicalities, affidavits and the next date of hearing. The State will always have an explanation. The question is whether that explanation should be enough when people's fundamental rights are at stake. (1/2)

You know what propaganda looks like? When an opposition representing 65% of the electorate takes to the streets to exercise its democratic right to protest over SIR, a voter-list exercise that, looking at the evidence before us, increasingly resembles voter-list fixing, and the State responds by dragging, bruising and beating protesters. And what does much of the mainstream media do? Spend the evening celebrating 25 years of Modi. India Today even paused live coverage of the protests to showcase Modi’s 25 years in power. The same India Today that once put “Divider No. 1” on its cover in 2003. When hundreds of crores are spent building the “Brand Modi” and so much of that ecosystem flows into the media, the so-called Fourth Estate begins to look less like journalism and more like a paid propaganda machine. That isn’t journalism. It is power protecting power. Anyway, I hope democracy prevails. And I hope young Indians stay united, against bigotry, falsehood and corruption.

More than 2.5 lakh students study at Delhi University. Add the School of Open Learning, and the number crosses 5 lakh. And the total strength of official hostels? Just around 7,000. Barely 2.7% of regular students. The rest are pushed into paying guests and unregulated private accommodation. @kanhaiyakumar was talking exactly about this yesterday in his presser.

Nepal crisis in 4 slides. It also has a section on danger it poses for India, today and in future. Full dashboard on swechha.in/now/climate-event…