Shocking incidents of anti-India activities inside the Jawaharlal Nehru University campus have taken the country by storm. We must end hate-this-nation nonsense, flourishing in the garb of free speech
Controversies emanating over the right to freedom of speech and expression is common to democracies. The United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, the US and India, among others, constantly contemplate over how much is too much. As alumni of India’s premier institution, the Jawaharlal Nehru University, my wife and I too are debating this question in our household, in the wake of the slogan controversy that has engulfed the JNU.
For us, the JNU symbolised critical thinking, free speech and a vibrant debating culture thriving in classrooms, hostel messes and tea stalls. Students’ elections are unique as only hand-made posters are permitted and presidential debate remains the top attraction, uncommon in most other universities. The posters, put at designated spaces, not only reflect the core of various political ideologies represented on the campus, but also offer a sneak peek into key issues confronting national and campus politics. This was the JNU we admired.
But the slogans raised on February 9 on the campus by the left-leaning activists and students, have triggered a nationwide outrage, prompting the arrest of the JNU Students Union president Kanhaiya Kumar by the police. Hinging on the freedom of speech debate, the incident highlights key trends that signify the socio-political churning that India is currently experiencing.
Growing radicalisation at campuses:The controversy was triggered by a widely advertised ‘cultural evening’ of artistes and activists, organised by one Democratic Students Union. The objective was to protest against the alleged “Brahmanical collective conscience, against the ‘judicial killings’ of Afzal Guru (2001 Parliament attack convict) and Maqbool Bhatt (a Kashmiri separatist), in solidarity with the Kashmiri people for their democratic right to self-determination”. The JNU administration denied permission upon knowing that it was meant for screening a film to commemorate Afzal Guru’s ‘martyrdom’. This led to the DSU-led demonstrations in which the following controversial slogans were raised: “Until the liberation of Kashmir, we shall fight”; “Until India is broken into pieces, we shall fight”; “Kashmir, Kerala want freedom”; “For every Afzal killed, one will emerge from every house”; “Afzal, we are ashamed that your killers (the Indian state including the Supreme Court that sentenced, and the President who rejected his clemency plea) are alive”; “India go back”; and, “Until the destruction of India, we shall fight”. These slogans symbolise a growing presence of the influence of Kashmiri separatists in campus politics across India, with such pro-Afzal Guru protests being reported from Jamia Millia Islamia (Delhi), Aligarh Muslim University (Uttar Pradesh), and now Jadavpur University (West Bengal), where the Chief Minister has remained tight-lipped for fear of losing minority support.
Sedition laws a necessary evilIJA related issue that is linked to the above-mentioned trend is the invocation of sedition clause under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code by Delhi Police to arrest Kanhaiya Kumar. Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom have abolished sedition laws. Should India follow suitIJ Given India’s tumultuous communal past that underpins the Hindu-Muslim discord and the rise of home-grown terrorism, and pending disputes, especially Kashmir, with Pakistan, India cannot repeal sedition laws. The UK has abolished sedition laws but the threat remains, as Prime Minister David Cameron observed: “All public institutions have a role to play in rooting out and challenging extremism. It is not about oppressing free speech or stifling academic freedom; it is about making sure that radical views and ideas are not given the oxygen they need to flourish. Schools, universities and colleges, more than anywhere else, have a duty to protect impressionable young minds...”
Political disunity and double standards: Given the blurred nature of India’s internal and external challenges, political honesty and understanding are fundamental requirements that curb political parochialism for the common public good. Instead, Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi defended ‘free speech’ to secure students’ support, forgetting that it was his great-grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru who had banned numerous newspapers, journals and magazines for criticising his policies; that it was his grandmother Indira Gandhi who had imposed Emergency, suspending all civic liberties and arresting most of her political opponents; and that it was his father Rajiv Gandhi who had banned Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses. Both Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhatt were also executed during the Congress regimes, and now Mr Rahul Gandhi is sympathising with students who were eulogising the two. Mr Sitaram Yechury of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and a JNU alumnus, while calling for upholding democratic ethos, boasted before the students how in the 1980s, they had hijacked Government busses and threatened to destroy Government property on the JNU campus, to get their comrades freed. There was no mention of the offensive slogans made. The CPI(M)’s support for China’s attack in 1962 and the crackdown on students in Tiananmen Square are well documented.
Civic activism a consequence of political parochialismIJThe growing public frustration with political corruption and parochialism had trigged impromptu anti-corruption protests across India that culminated with the victory of the Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi. The same frustration explains an unprecedented response of the JNU staff employed in the administration, schools and hostels, against the JNU academic staff for the latter’s passive support of the sloganeering and the accused students. To counter, the JNU Teachers Associations’ and students’ strike, the staff employees also threatened to stop all cleaning works and cooking in hostel messes. In the court, some lawyers attacked Kumar and his supporters. locals also surrounded the JNU campus, waved the Indian flag and raised nationalist slogans. Reports of backlash also poured in from other parts of India. Some Defence personnel with JNU degrees threatened to return their degrees, and the widows of the killed policemen in the 2001 Parliament attack are also said to be planning demonstrations against the JNU. These reactions symbolise the growing civic activism and vigilantism to compensate for political parochialism.
The larger schism, a concern: India seems as politically disunited as it was in 1526 at the time of the Mughal invasion. An intense political schism plagues the polity, society and its academic institutions. Political parties have succumbed to caste, creed and religion-based politics to wrest power, at the cost of the nation’s internal cohesion. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP are constantly being targeted, and critical Bills blocked in the Parliament. Political bipartisanship is long dead.
(The writer is India Engagement Fellow, University of Queensland)