This is part of a series on nonviolent protest methods, which explains approaches and provides inspirational examples from history. For additional resources, please explore the Museum of Protest’s activist guides and view items in the collection.

Renouncing honors means voluntarily rejecting an honor or award – such as a medal, title, or prize – usually given by a government, institution, or leader.

This could take the form of declining an award, returning a medal or certificate, or asking to be stripped of a title. The key is that the honoree publicly disassociates themselves from the honor. In effect, the person is saying: “I refuse to be celebrated by you under current circumstances.”

It’s a striking reversal of the normal order – honors are meant to reward and flatter, but here the recipient throws the honor back as a form of protest.

This method works as a protest because it turns a symbol of approval into a symbol of shame. Honors are typically used by authorities to legitimize themselves (for example, by showing they reward heroes or talented citizens). When an honoree renounces the award, it embarrasses the authority and draws attention to a grievance.

How and Why Renouncing Honors Is Effective

Symbolic Impact: Renouncing an honor is a deeply symbolic act of dissent. It often garners media coverage and public attention because it’s unexpected – people usually covet honors, not reject them. The very rarity of the gesture makes it newsworthy. For the authority, a renounced honor can be a public relations fiasco, drawing more attention to whatever issue prompted the protest than if the person had quietly kept the award. For example, when Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore returned his British knighthood in 1919, British officials refused to accept his resignation of the title – but “Tagore’s gesture caught the world’s notice” and carried a subversive political message undermining British authority.

Moral Clarity: This tactic also carries moral weight. The individual makes a personal sacrifice – giving up a mark of distinction – to stand in solidarity with others or with a cause. Tagore, for instance, wrote that “The time has come when badges of honour make our shame glaring in their incongruous context of humiliation, and I…wish to stand, shorn of all special distinctions, by the side of my countrymen”. Such language turns an honor into a badge of shame for the authority that granted it. The act highlights the contrast between the honoree’s values and the authority’s actions, making a powerful moral statement.

Denying Legitimacy: Nonviolent resistance often works by withdrawing the pillars that support an unjust system. Renouncing honors denies the authority one such pillar: the appearance of broad public respect. When multiple people begin rejecting awards (for example, dozens of writers returning state awards), it signals that the regime’s symbolic authority is crumbling. Authorities often fear this undermining effect. In Tagore’s case, officials downplayed his protest, claiming his knighthood was apolitical and insisting he remained “Sir Rabindranath” despite his renunciation. But the damage was done – his open letter was reprinted widely, and the public understood his message.

Shifting the Narrative: Renouncing an honor can force a conversation. It takes a positive news item (someone receiving an award) and flips it into a critique of the status quo. Suddenly, instead of talking about the honoree’s achievements, people are talking about why they would reject such an honor. This shifts public discourse onto the protester’s terms. Often the honoree will issue a public statement or open letter explaining their reasons, which can be quoted in the press and spread the protest message far and wide.

Strategies for Using This Method Effectively

Choose the Right Moment: Timing is crucial. Renounce an honor when it will resonate most – ideally right after an incident or decision that you are protesting. For instance, if a government commits an injustice, a recipient of a state honor might return it soon after, connecting the two events in the public’s mind. A well-timed renunciation can serve as a wake-up call to the public. It’s often effective to do it while the issue is in the news, ensuring your protest is seen as a direct response to current events.

Be Public and Clear: A renounced honor should be accompanied by a clear public explanation. This often takes the form of an open letter, press release, or public statement. Explain exactly why you are rejecting the award – what principles or events compel you to take this step. The wording can be respectful but firm. Some protesters address their letter to the person or institution that gave the award (for example, writing to a President or committee) to formally hand back the honor. John Lennon, when returning his Member of the British Empire medal in 1969, wrote a brief, pointed note to Queen Elizabeth II: “I am returning my MBE as a protest against Britain’s involvement in the Nigeria-Biafra thing, against our support of America in Vietnam and against ‘Cold Turkey’ slipping down the charts.” His mix of sincerity (war protests) and personal humor (“Cold Turkey” was his song) ensured the act got attention while clearly stating his political stance.

Coordinate if Possible: There is strength in numbers. If multiple honorees act together, the impact multiplies. A one-off renunciation might be dismissed as an isolated gesture, but a wave of returns is hard to ignore. In 2015, for example, “dozens of prominent writers and film-makers…returned awards” in India over what they saw as rising intolerance and attacks on free speech. This collective action (dubbed the “Award Wapsi” movement in India) made headlines globally and put significant pressure on the cultural institutions and government to respond. If you know others who share your concerns and also hold honors, coordinating announcements can create a cascading effect in the media and public discourse.

Consider the Audience and Context: Tailor your approach to the political and cultural context. In some cultures, rejecting a state honor might be seen as shocking or even scandalous – which can actually amplify your message. In other contexts, certain honors may not be widely understood by the public, so you may need to explain the significance of what you’re returning. Always frame your act as principled and patriotic (or community-minded): you are not disrespecting the people, country, or field that the honor represents, but rather standing up for its true values. For example, an war veteran returning a medal can emphasize that they are doing so to uphold the values they believed the medal stood for – peace, honor, duty – and to protest those values being betrayed.

Mind the Risks: While renouncing honors is nonviolent, it can have personal or professional repercussions. It might anger the authorities or certain segments of the public. Be prepared for criticism (some may call you ungrateful or disloyal) and have responses ready. However, if communicated well, many will understand that it takes courage to give up an honor for one’s principles. Make sure you are safe in making the gesture – in free societies the main risk is backlash or lost favors, but under repressive regimes, a high-profile rejection could invite harsher retaliation. In all cases, protesters weigh the importance of speaking truth to power against these risks. The history of this tactic shows that, more often than not, the bold statement reverberates positively and places the focus on the issues at hand.

Historical Examples of Renouncing Honors in Protest

Rabindranath Tagore (India, 1919): Tagore, a famed poet and Asia’s first Nobel laureate, was awarded a British knighthood – but after the brutal Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar, he could not keep the title. In a letter to the Viceroy, Tagore renounced his knighthood to protest the colonial atrocity. He wrote that the British “kill[ing of] innocent people” had made it impossible for him to be honored by the Crown, saying “badges of honour make our shame glaring… and I…wish to stand…by the side of my countrymen”. The British government, embarrassed by this, refused to officially revoke his “Sir” title, claiming the honor was unrelated to politics. Yet Tagore’s act resonated: it was reported worldwide and galvanized anti-colonial sentiment. By publicly returning the title, Tagore highlighted the hypocrisy of imperial “honors” amid oppression, and his stance inspired many others in India’s freedom movement.

Vietnam War Veterans (USA, 1971): In a dramatic collective protest, over 800 U.S. military veterans of the Vietnam War gathered in Washington, D.C. to return their service medals and decorations in April 1971. One by one, dressed in their uniforms, these veterans stood before the Capitol and hurled their Bronze Stars, Purple Hearts, campaign medals and even combat ribbons over a fence, towards the U.S. Capitol building. Some spoke briefly about the horrors of the war before throwing their medals. This event, organized by Vietnam Veterans Against the War, was a visceral renunciation of honors: the medals – normally symbols of valor – were turned into symbols of disillusionment and protest. A news report noted “over 800 Vietnam War veterans…ceremonially threw their medals, ribbons, and other markers of military valor onto the grounds in front of the Capitol” as a protest against the war. The image of war heroes casting away their honors made front-page news and undermined the U.S. government’s claim that opposition to the war was unpatriotic. It showed that even those who earned honors fighting for the country could denounce the war’s legitimacy. This act of renunciation added powerful moral weight to the anti-war movement and is often credited with helping turn public opinion against the conflict.

John Lennon (United Kingdom, 1969): Not only political figures or soldiers renounce honors – artists have done so too. In 1965, all four members of The Beatles received the MBE (Member of the Order of the British Empire) from the Queen. A few years later, amid the turbulent late 1960s, John Lennon returned his MBE medal to Buckingham Palace. He sent it back in November 1969 with a witty yet pointed note: “I am returning my MBE as a protest against Britain’s involvement in the Nigeria-Biafra thing, against our support of America in Vietnam, and against ‘Cold Turkey’ slipping down the charts.” With this one line, Lennon tied his renunciation to the Biafra civil war in Nigeria, the Vietnam War, and a tongue-in-cheek reference to his latest single’s poor chart performance. The inclusion of a joking gripe alongside serious issues was classic Lennon, but the message was clear – he was unwilling to hold onto a royal honor while these violent conflicts persisted. The British press and public sat up and took notice. It was rare for a pop culture icon to rebuff the establishment so directly. Lennon’s gesture added celebrity wattage to anti-war sentiment and embarrassed the UK government. (Technically, one does not simply “nullify” an honor by returning it – the official records still listed Lennon as an MBE – but symbolically his protest was loud and clear.) Decades later, people still cite John Lennon’s returned MBE as a landmark example of an artist using renunciation of an honor to make a political point.

“Award Wapsi” Writers and Artists (India, 2015): In 2015, a wave of intolerance and several violent incidents in India – including the murders of rationalist thinkers and lynchings linked to religious hate – sparked an extraordinary collective protest by India’s intellectuals. Dozens of renowned writers, poets, and filmmakers began returning their national awards to the government. This movement, dubbed “Award Wapsi” (Hindi for “returning awards”), saw scholars and artists mailing back prestigious honors like the Sahitya Akademi Award (a top literary prize) and Padma awards (civilian honors). They declared they could not in good conscience hold these awards when freedom of expression and pluralism were under threat. One report noted that “dozens of writers…have returned awards over what they say is a growing climate of intolerance” under the government. The protest had a snowball effect – each return inspired another. For example, novelist Arundhati Roy returned a national award, stating it was in protest of “the growing violence and horrific injustices” against minorities. Eminent scientist P. M. Bhargava gave back his Padma Bhushan award, saying “The future of democracy is at stake”. This collective renunciation captured huge public attention and ignited debate about the direction of the country. While the government initially dismissed the protest as political theatrics, the outcry forced leaders and cultural institutions to address the concerns. The mass renouncing of honors by respected figures made a powerful statement: it suggested that the government’s accolades were hollow if the values of tolerance and free speech were not upheld. In effect, the protesters weaponized their honors to shame the authorities into action or at least into dialogue.

Bob Geldof (Ireland, 2017): Renouncing honors can also be a way to protest who else holds an honor. In 2017, Irish musician and activist Sir Bob Geldof returned the Freedom of the City of Dublin – an award he had received in 2005 – because Myanmar’s de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi held the same honor. Suu Kyi, once seen as a human rights icon, was widely criticized for condoning or ignoring the violent persecution of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. Geldof declared he “could not continue to hold the honor” while “a handmaiden to genocide” (as he bluntly termed Suu Kyi) was on the same roll of honor. In a public ceremony, he handed back his scroll, calling on Dublin to revoke Suu Kyi’s award. “I don’t want to be on a very select roll of wonderful people with a killer,” he said, referring to Suu Kyi’s complicity. His renunciation put pressure on the city council, which indeed began procedures to remove Suu Kyi’s Freedom of the City. Geldof’s protest showed a unique twist on renouncing honors: sometimes the issue is not the authority that gave the award, but a fellow honoree whose actions you find abhorrent. By sacrificing his own honor, Geldof maximized pressure on the authorities to distance themselves from a once-admired figure turned pariah. The move was highly publicized and added to international condemnation of Myanmar’s government. It exemplified how renouncing an honor can elevate human rights issues on the world stage.