Madam, - Breda O'Brien in a thought-provoking article (June 26th) tries to bring conditionality on a person's right to protest - that the protester must be "acting not out of a reflexive dislike, but a genuine desire to provide real alternatives against which we protest".
The only condition which the protester must observe is that he/she does not infringe on the rights of others who may see things differently.
The right to protest creates a corresponding duty on the state/society to defend and protect the person's right to protest because the protester is fulfilling a civic and moral duty to expose what he/she believes is a cancer in the body politic. We cannot expect "real alternatives" from the whistle-blower/protester. The person's duty is fulfilled once the evil is exposed and consequently it is up to the society to listen and respond. No other responsibility should be laid on the shoulders of the protester.
Ms O'Brien worries thatt "those of us who march against Bush's policy on Iraq have a big question to answer. What alternative do we have to offer?" The alternative is simple - let international law determine the alternative. It is the responsibility of the Irish Government not to be silent and complicit but to respond to the rightful concerns of the protesters who are courageously carrying out their civic and moral duty, and as a consequence often have to endure mud- slinging and worse from the establishment which wishes to see and hear no criticism that might upset their cosy and smug careers. - Yours, etc.,
BRENDAN BUTLER , Pennock Hill, Swords, Co Dublin.