<p class="title">The Supreme Court on Thursday sought to brush aside an analogy being drawn between pro-democracy protests of students and others in Hong Kong and protests in Jammu and Kashmir, saying there was no cross-border terrorism in Hong Kong.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, representing an intervenor in the matter questioning curbs on communications in Jammu and Kashmir, contended before a bench presided over by Justice N V Ramana that the Hong Kong court applied the test of proportionality and quashed the order for the protesters not to wear masks.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Indian Supreme Court is far superior in upholding fundamental rights of citizens. The citizens are already aware of the restrictions being lifted,” Justice Ramana said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Arora, for her part, said the situation in Hong Kong was far worse. The Hong Kong administration recently imposed a ban on wearing masks by protesters but it was quashed as unconstitutional.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Is there cross-border terrorism in Hong Kong,” the bench asked the counsel who maintained open criticism of government policies and acts should not be suppressed and there should be no fear of communications and travel.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Our SC has delivered judgements upholding rights of the citizens. Why bank upon Hong Kong judgement,” Justice B R Gavai asked sitting in the bench, also comprising R Subhash Reddy.</p>
<p class="title">The Supreme Court on Thursday sought to brush aside an analogy being drawn between pro-democracy protests of students and others in Hong Kong and protests in Jammu and Kashmir, saying there was no cross-border terrorism in Hong Kong.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, representing an intervenor in the matter questioning curbs on communications in Jammu and Kashmir, contended before a bench presided over by Justice N V Ramana that the Hong Kong court applied the test of proportionality and quashed the order for the protesters not to wear masks.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Indian Supreme Court is far superior in upholding fundamental rights of citizens. The citizens are already aware of the restrictions being lifted,” Justice Ramana said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Arora, for her part, said the situation in Hong Kong was far worse. The Hong Kong administration recently imposed a ban on wearing masks by protesters but it was quashed as unconstitutional.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Is there cross-border terrorism in Hong Kong,” the bench asked the counsel who maintained open criticism of government policies and acts should not be suppressed and there should be no fear of communications and travel.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Our SC has delivered judgements upholding rights of the citizens. Why bank upon Hong Kong judgement,” Justice B R Gavai asked sitting in the bench, also comprising R Subhash Reddy.</p>
