he early signs of what is coming to the education sector in India was clear to experienced academic eyes in the 2014 general elections, which made Narendra Modi the 14th prime minister of India.
The late Atal Bihari Vajpayee, one of India’s most charming and admired leaders in recent times, led the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as prime minister when it was in power in India from 1998 to 2004. The difference in 2014 was, Modi was a right–wing leader in a right–wing party, whereas Vajpayee belonged to the liberal wing of the BJP.
Indian–born Nobel Laureate Dr. Venkatraman Ramakrishnan did not mince his words on the current administration, calling the Indian Science Congress in 2016 a “circus.” This year has seen similar sentiments.
Liberal and critical academic voices have been slowly stifled. A “Saffronisation”of the primary to higher–education system of India is often discussed as a credible accusation, not purely a figment of the imagination.
Just a couple of such instances include the exit of Pratap Bhanu Mehta from Ashoka University and the exit of Paranjoy Guha Thakurta from the Economic and Political Weekly in 2017. These did not herald a renewal of academic freedom and autonomy.
More recently, the governor of West Bengal, a key opposition–ruled state in India, removed vice–chancellors of state universities in 2023, including the famed Jadavpur University, naming himself the interim vice chancellor of these universities. While there may have been irregularities in the functioning of these universities, or in the offices of the vice chancellors, the governor’s solution was a disproportionate response which made things worse. A similar situation took place in Kerala, another Indian state ruled by non–BJP political parties. Education is a subject on the Concurrent List of the Indian Constitution, which means education is both a state and federal responsibility.
It would be wrong to single–out BJP as standing against academic voices or opinions. Back in 2015, Professor Ambikesh Mahapatra of Jadavpur University was jailed for 11 years for merely forwarding cartoons of the firebrand regional party leader of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, leader of the regional opposition party, the Trinamool Congress. The law which enabled such a draconian and disproportionate response was apparently the brain–child of, the Harvard–educated key member of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s administration.
Our point is, we academicians have been insignificant in the big power plays in India. The parties across the political landscape have never left us alone in our classrooms or research labs. We haven’t had the luxury to make jokes or express serious opinions regarding the importance of academic autonomy and freedom. For example, consider the Indian Institute of Technology–Delhi and Jawaharlal Nehru University, the two leading academic institutes of India. IIT Delhi, primarily being a technical institute, is much more disciplined; whereas JNU, by its very nature and by possibly being the top institute of India in areas of social sciences, is a place for budding political leaders of the country, and thereby has been more politically “noisy” in its character.
It was in 2016 when India’s current University Grants Commission chairman, M. Jagadesh Kumar, took over the position of vice chancellor at JNU; and since 2016, a student activist, a JNU scholar named Umar Khalid, has largely been behind bars. Khalid’s case remains in the courts and it is therefore improper and inappropriate to comment on it. However, what remains striking is the similarities of such a case with that of Aaron Swartz (or that of Julian Assange of Wikileaks).
Swartz probably had the best legal counsel in Lawrence Lessig of Harvard Law School. Similarly, Umar Khalid has the backing of Indian conscience keeper Prashant Bhushan, a brilliant lawyer and activist himself and a visiting professor at top universities globally. However there are times when top constitutional experts too feel helpless, when the state uses all its means against its own citizens, to teach someone, such as an otherwise insignificant academician or a student, a lesson.
Editor's Note: Prof. Ambikesh Mahapatra was not jailed, he was taken to the police station and held for night. A court case later found in his favor.
a global affairs media network
The fear of change at Indian universities
Photo by Javier Allegue Barros on Unsplash
April 13, 2024
India’s universities have, in the past decade, increasingly stifled progressive and critical academic voices due, seemingly, to political interference. It’s a worrying trend which goes beyond one party and has reduced the role of academia, write Ranjit Goswami and Surjyasikha Das.
T
he early signs of what is coming to the education sector in India was clear to experienced academic eyes in the 2014 general elections, which made Narendra Modi the 14th prime minister of India.
The late Atal Bihari Vajpayee, one of India’s most charming and admired leaders in recent times, led the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as prime minister when it was in power in India from 1998 to 2004. The difference in 2014 was, Modi was a right–wing leader in a right–wing party, whereas Vajpayee belonged to the liberal wing of the BJP.
Indian–born Nobel Laureate Dr. Venkatraman Ramakrishnan did not mince his words on the current administration, calling the Indian Science Congress in 2016 a “circus.” This year has seen similar sentiments.
Liberal and critical academic voices have been slowly stifled. A “Saffronisation”of the primary to higher–education system of India is often discussed as a credible accusation, not purely a figment of the imagination.
Just a couple of such instances include the exit of Pratap Bhanu Mehta from Ashoka University and the exit of Paranjoy Guha Thakurta from the Economic and Political Weekly in 2017. These did not herald a renewal of academic freedom and autonomy.
More recently, the governor of West Bengal, a key opposition–ruled state in India, removed vice–chancellors of state universities in 2023, including the famed Jadavpur University, naming himself the interim vice chancellor of these universities. While there may have been irregularities in the functioning of these universities, or in the offices of the vice chancellors, the governor’s solution was a disproportionate response which made things worse. A similar situation took place in Kerala, another Indian state ruled by non–BJP political parties. Education is a subject on the Concurrent List of the Indian Constitution, which means education is both a state and federal responsibility.
It would be wrong to single–out BJP as standing against academic voices or opinions. Back in 2015, Professor Ambikesh Mahapatra of Jadavpur University was jailed for 11 years for merely forwarding cartoons of the firebrand regional party leader of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, leader of the regional opposition party, the Trinamool Congress. The law which enabled such a draconian and disproportionate response was apparently the brain–child of, the Harvard–educated key member of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s administration.
Our point is, we academicians have been insignificant in the big power plays in India. The parties across the political landscape have never left us alone in our classrooms or research labs. We haven’t had the luxury to make jokes or express serious opinions regarding the importance of academic autonomy and freedom. For example, consider the Indian Institute of Technology–Delhi and Jawaharlal Nehru University, the two leading academic institutes of India. IIT Delhi, primarily being a technical institute, is much more disciplined; whereas JNU, by its very nature and by possibly being the top institute of India in areas of social sciences, is a place for budding political leaders of the country, and thereby has been more politically “noisy” in its character.
It was in 2016 when India’s current University Grants Commission chairman, M. Jagadesh Kumar, took over the position of vice chancellor at JNU; and since 2016, a student activist, a JNU scholar named Umar Khalid, has largely been behind bars. Khalid’s case remains in the courts and it is therefore improper and inappropriate to comment on it. However, what remains striking is the similarities of such a case with that of Aaron Swartz (or that of Julian Assange of Wikileaks).
Swartz probably had the best legal counsel in Lawrence Lessig of Harvard Law School. Similarly, Umar Khalid has the backing of Indian conscience keeper Prashant Bhushan, a brilliant lawyer and activist himself and a visiting professor at top universities globally. However there are times when top constitutional experts too feel helpless, when the state uses all its means against its own citizens, to teach someone, such as an otherwise insignificant academician or a student, a lesson.
Editor's Note: Prof. Ambikesh Mahapatra was not jailed, he was taken to the police station and held for night. A court case later found in his favor.
