Most protesters at Shaheen Bagh have told the interlocutors that the Supreme Court should first decide on their demand for repealing the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

Supreme Court lawyers Sanjay Hegde and Sadhna Ramachandran spoke to the women for the second day as part of an attempt at mediation to get vacated the arterial road on which the vigil is being held.

Many protesters, who were earlier under the misconception that the interlocutors have a say on the fate of the CAA, have hardened their resolve not to vacate the road until the law is repealed. The overarching feeling appeared to be mistrust of the government that has not made any sincere attempt at reaching out to the protesters.

There was also no finality on a request by the interlocutors to meet the protesters in smaller groups as the talks were frequently getting interrupted by groups within the protest tent.

After much persuasion, Hegde and Ramachandran finally got their way in making the media leave the stage area as many who spoke made long speeches facing the cameras, often repeating points raised earlier.

Two grandmothers told reporters they were willing to speak in any format as long as the court decides fast on the CAA.

“We trust the court. We kept quiet after their decision on the (Babri) mosque. In the same way, give a decision on my problem also. Let them open all other roads that are blocked,” Bilkis Bano said.

Mehrunissa said: “This is not just our issue, but of the whole country. They can take our interviews in small groups so that they can present our views before the court.”

On Wednesday, the interlocutors had attempted to make the protesters express their views unhindered in the hope that they would be in a frame of mind to work out a solution on Thursday.

However, on Thursday too, people repeatedly asked about how the government, courts and society in general could ignore their pain about a citizenship matrix that discriminates on the basis of faith.

Ramachandran said: “The court will decide on the CAA and the NRC. No one can guess the outcome at the moment…. The Supreme Court has extended its arm towards you. Sanjay and I don’t want you to stop the protest…. No one wants to get hurt and no one wants to hurt anyone…. If we don’t come to a conclusion, the case will go back to the Supreme Court and then we will not be able to do anything.”

The interlocutors’ position has become doubly difficult as neither do they have anything to offer nor is there an organised leadership of the protest without whom even minor adjustments to the location of the vigil site cannot be worked out, sources said.

Although a section of organisers had hoped to achieve legal protection for the protest by giving concessions such as vacating one carriageway, the majority feels that making a stand on the road has inspired other protests and will eventually force the government to roll back the law.

The interlocutors iterated the need to have discussions with smaller groups. The gathering protested loudly, and no decision could be reached in almost two hours of talks. It was unclear at night if the interlocutors would return to the tent on Friday.

After a delegation had met lieutenant-governor Anil Baijal last month, the protesters do not recognise any delegate as their leader. Also, they are yet to receive any reply from the Centre on their memorandum to Baijal.

Ramachandran said: “Shaheen Bagh is there and will remain, but we should come up with a solution in such a way that this protest remains here as well as everyone’s concerns are addressed, we should have faith in the SC.”

Hegde urged the protesters to recognise that they only had time until Monday’s hearing to work out a solution.

A protester named Niloufer told reporters after the meeting: “We are here only to protest against the NRC (National Register of Citizens) and the CAA. If we get up, it will only be after the law is repealed, and we will go back only to our homes and not another protest site. It is unacceptable to us that our main problem — which is this unjust law — is completely ignored in these negotiations.”