The resignation of academic stalwart PB Mehta in March this year stirred an extremely crucial and relevant debate on the state of Academic Freedom in India. When an eminent professor and VC of a leading liberal arts university resigns by mentioning that his writings have become a political liability for the institution, it certainly is an indication that the water is way above the mark. In his solidarity, Arvind Subramanian also resigned from the same university while the intelligentsia watched in abject silence. How is the education system supposed to grow in these circumstances where academics are constantly walking on eggshells?
Unfortunately, the tussle between politicians and academics is a global phenomenon. The precise reason for this is the political insecurity of the elected representatives and their deep-seated desire to control. In a shocking move, the Hungarian government ousted the Central European University from its country and the university was forced to relocate to Vienna in Austria.
There are some notable instances from the US which help in understanding this issue with a broader perspective. In the US, there is a growing controversy about teaching of the Critical Race Theory (CRT). There is a massive resistance by Republicans over the teaching of CRT in schools/colleges. Some of the states have taken legislative measures to restrict the teaching of CRT while for some states the issue is still in debate. Critical Race Theory traces its roots back to the 1970s from the law schools of America. A myriad number of civil rights scholars and professors recognized the intersection of race with the law by writing about the systemic and institutionalized racism which was prevalent in the US. The theory raised some tough questions which reflected the sordid history of racial oppression. It was like a mirror for a country that never wanted to admit the fact that racism had always persisted whether directly or indirectly. The conservatives there want to create a bubble where there is no deliberation with the CRT, academic or otherwise.
Another aspect which is somewhat less talked about is that of funding and management of universities. The opposition is not always from the politicians but can emerge from the boards of trustees as well. This happened recently when Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Nikole Hannah Jones was denied tenure by the University of North Carolina because of her association with 1619 project of the New York Times. Project 1619 is an effort to engage with the history of slavery and to bring out the lost voices which shaped the American history. It too faced stiff resistance from the conservative sections who have expressed displeasure on teaching “1619 Project” in schools. Even more shocking is the fact that certain events were categorically omitted from the school curriculums and were never taught. Case in point is the ‘Tulsa Massacre of 1921,” a horrifying incident which was not taught in US schools for many years.
Turning a blind eye to the history or being in denial is a coward’s attempt at governance. An attempt to restrict the academic engagements or research is the first step in the beginning of a totalitarian regime. Although courts have provided some respite in this regard, the same is not enough as the attack on academic freedom still continues. The US Supreme Court in the case of Regents of University of Michigan v. Ewing observed:
“Academic freedom thrives not only on the independent and uninhibited exchange of ideas among teachers and students, but also, and somewhat inconsistently, on autonomous decision making by the academy itself.”
This was again referred by the US Supreme Court in the case of Univ. of Wisconsin System v. Southworth, ruling that academic freedom is a right rooted in the Constitution. At this juncture, it is also essential to point out that restrictions and coercion tactics applied on academics are also a violation of the inherent right of free speech. Free speech as a right is covered under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution and the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Academic dissent can in no way be equated to a political dissent and the same goes beyond political ideologies and partisanships. What I mean here is that an academic dissent should, in no way, trigger the government and the politicians should stop behaving like snowflakes! A university is supposed to be a “safe space” for the students to grow, learn and expand their horizons. It is a place for students to question, debate and challenge their own understandings and pre-conceived notions. In this quest for knowledge and research, the professors have a very vital role to play. They are the ones who equip the students with a perspective and also become a family to them; a home away from home. For a university to thrive, it needs substantial academic freedom to provide a meaningful space for the professors to conduct their research and design their course. Curbing of dissent in universities and colleges is a serious issue which needs to be talked about. Meddling with the curriculum to push a one-sided narrative hijacks the free-flow of ideas. Eventually, it ends up gravely injuring the evolutionary trajectory of a student. When the academic discourse is faced with impediments, the society as a whole takes the first step towards intellectual bankruptcy.
Like the politicians are entitled to a set of “Parliamentary Privileges,” the time has come for the recognition of “Academic Freedom” as a matter of right for the universities as well as academics or researchers. A course cannot be changed just because it does not cater to a certain “politically conducive” narrative. It should be understood by everyone that academia is not a place for running the government propaganda.
Yes, the university campuses are often politically charged, but this is the way a democracy is supposed to function. The engagement of youth in political, social debates is an indicator of a healthy democracy. Student politics has been the start of many influential moments and has given birth to many phenomenal leaders, statesmen etc. However, the government of India under Prime Minister Modi remains wary of the student protestors and has treated them with skepticism.
The ruling party is in a state of oblivion as to the fact that many of their party leaders emerged from student politics such as Atal Bihari Vajpayee (Former PM of India), Arun Jaitley (Former Finance Minister of India) and the likes. Sordidly, in India the protesting students are lathi charged on college campuses and dissenters are arbitrarily clamped down. This has indeed become a cause of grave concern for the spirit of a well-meaning democracy. Justice DY Chandrachud has aptly said, “Dissent is the safety valve of Democracy” and these words are extremely relevant in the present times. The Indian government must realize the fact that every dissent is not “sedition” and every dissenter is not “anti-national.”
Anant Prakash Mishra is a law student at The WB National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata. His areas of interest include Comparative Constitution and Anti-Discrimination Laws.
Suggested citation: Anant Prakash Mishra, From “Resignations” to “Restrictions:” How Academic Freedom Worldwide is in Perpetual Jeopardy, JURIST – Student Commentary, June 26, 2021, https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2021/06/anant-mishra-resignations-restrictions-academic-freedom/.
This article was prepared for publication by Sambhav Sharma, a JURIST Staff Editor. Please direct any questions or comments to him at commentary@jurist.org
