The fading role of universities as conscience of society Premium

With higher education centres turning into carriers of political propaganda, there is little room for academic freedom or informed public discourse

Logo of Indian Institute of Science seen at the university’s campus in Bengaluru. In 2023, the IISc had to call off a discussion on the UAPA, organised by its students and faculty. File | Photo Credit: PTI

The University Grants Commission (UGC)’s directive to universities and colleges in the country to install the Union Government’s Beti Bachao Beti Padhao (BBBP) logo on their premises should be treated as another attempt to curtail academic freedom, which is already under siege. This is not a one-off incident. Such diktats from the government have been sent to these institutes previously too. Earlier, they were asked to conduct activities such as generating awareness on G-20 meetings and Swachhatha campaigns. As a repeat of such directives, the UGC, in a letter of December 1, required the colleges to create selfie points featuring the Prime Minister.

The aim of the selfie point, according to the letter, is to create awareness among the youth about India’s achievements in various fields, particularly the new initiatives under the National Education Policy 2020. However, such moves aimed at advancing the political agenda of the ruling regime through the universities would seriously dilute the academic institutes’ freedom and ability to follow their agenda of teaching and research that finally generates new ideas.

While the government’s insistence that academic institutes act as carriers of their political propaganda is becoming more trenchant, the concept of universities being vehicles of free thought would fall by the wayside. Ironically, the current ruling establishment is led by those who fought the Emergency of the 1970s — the first attempt to drag independent India towards homogenisation and regimentation of thought. It appears that they are using the same playbook to stifle the higher study centres from maintaining spaces for dissent.

The last year saw several occasions that attempted to throttle academic freedom. Indian Institute of Science (IISc) — the country’s top-ranking institute — had to call off a discussion on the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), organised by its students and faculty. Last March, the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) administration decided to impose fines to the tune of ₹20,000 for protesting on the campus — a decision withdrawn later. The sanctity of academic freedom recently came into question when two important scholars resigned from their positions at Ashoka University following the publication of a paper that argued that the ruling party won a disproportionate share of seats in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls. Can Democracy survive without dissenters and critical thinkers? What better platform than an academic institute to hold such discussions? Such discussions are crucial in a functioning democracy, regardless of anyone’s ideology or belief system. Placing restrictions on the articulation of one’s opinion or ideas can negatively impact academic work and hurt the research environment.

As it is clear from the speeches given in high-profile meetings like the G-20 Summit, even those who hold top positions in the current ruling dispensation are proud to single out India’s role in upholding democratic values. The Prime Minister himself proudly proclaimed in a venue provided by the American Congress during his last year’s visit to the U.S. that democracy is part of Indian DNA. But what is missing in such performative chest-thumpings on the Indian democracy is the lack of concern for the freedom to conduct civic discourses that are vital for participatory democracy to thrive.

The downward spiral of academic freedom is reflected in India’s position in the indices prepared by the V-Dem Institute of the University of Gothenburg in Sweden. India’s academic freedom index is in the bottom 30% among 179 countries, according to last year’s report, published on February 2, 2023. On a scale of 0 (low) to 1 (high), India scored 0.38. The V-Dem Institute’s indicators include freedom to research and teach; freedom of academic exchange and dissemination; institutional autonomy of universities; campus integrity; and the freedom of academic and cultural expression. What’s ironic is that this score is lower than India’s bête noire Pakistan’s 0.43. Independent India had seen such low rankings only during the Emergency years of the mid-70s.

In recent times, we have seen many such examples of the government intimidating scholars working in the knowledge sector into submission, either by intimidation or sending them to jail. Unlike in New Zealand, academic freedom is not mentioned in the Indian constitution; it is subsumed in the concept of the right to free speech as a part of the fundamental rights. A guaranteed principle in the Indian constitution, it is subject to reasonable restrictions emanating from the considerations of sovereignty, integrity, security, public order, and morality. The constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech is often hindered by the application of sedition law (Section 124A) or more commonly misused clauses under Section 295A – hurting religious feelings. Defamation lawsuits are now becoming tools of harassment against artists and academic scholars.

The fading academic freedom is also reflected in the gradual erosion of institutional autonomy, including the selection of Vice-Chancellors and heads of academic institutes. The UGC Act of 1956 specifically says that its core function is to monitor the standards in universities, “in consultation with universities”, besides regulating fees, determining the qualifications for faculty, and setting minimum standards of instruction. As Niraja Gopal Jayal wrote in one of her essays, the UGC “has seen a steady accretion of power and displayed a heightened propensity to function as an instrument of the ministry”.

The lack of academic autonomy is the bane that extends to the State level, too, and numerous instances of academic interference by the State governments have come to public attention. It has now become a common practice, both at the Central and State government levels, to make university appointments on political considerations rather than merit. The poor leadership of universities thus developed works in tandem with the ruling parties to further their political interests, thus internally sabotaging the autonomy.

In a detailed analysis of academic freedom published in India Forum, Nandini Sundar and Gowhar Fazili say, “Contracts with faculty should include a clause on the protection of academic freedom, i.e., they will not be penalized for extra-mural activities…Global institutions can help by including ‘Academic Freedom’ as one indicator in university rankings…” It is time that universities and higher education centres formulate system-wide protections against restricting academic autonomy and freedom of expression, taking a leaf out of the Education Act legislated by the Government of New Zealand, wherein, among other points, academic freedom is defined as: “the freedom of academic staff and students, within the law, to question and test received wisdom, to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions”.

The political parties, in the larger interest of the nation, must begin consultations with faculty bodies and students’ associations to change the current sorry state of academic freedom and autonomy in the country.

We are celebrating the 75th year of India’s existence as a Republic. It is time to remember that we are yet to realise Tagore’s vision of a nation, where the “mind is without fear”, as invoked in his soul-stirring poem, which was written when India was still a colony of the British.

C.P. Rajendran is an adjunct professor at the National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bengaluru; he is the author of the upcoming book, The Rumbling Earth – The story of India Earthquakes, to be published by Penguin Random House. All views are personal