Government Alleges Activist Sonam Wangchuk Incited Violence with References to Regional Unrest and Arab Spring

In a significant legal proceeding before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta presented the government's position that activist Sonam Wangchuk's public statements constituted dangerous incitement to violence. The government's argument centered on Wangchuk's alleged references to neighboring nations Nepal and Bangladesh, along with invocations of the Arab Spring uprisings, as potentially inflammatory rhetoric. According to the Solicitor General's submission, Wangchuk's discourse extended beyond political protest to include explicit encouragement of self-immolation and calls for non-cooperation in scenarios of external aggression. This characterization frames the activist's statements not merely as political dissent but as direct threats to public order and national security. The government's legal position suggests a deliberate attempt to draw parallels between regional political movements and domestic unrest, potentially destabilizing social cohesion. The case represents a critical examination of the boundaries between protected speech and unlawful incitement within India's constitutional framework, with implications for both civil liberties and national security protocols.