Home | Issue Briefs | Events | Reports | Links | About | Action

Issue Brief

July 13, 2001

India to Require Government Approval for International Academic Symposia

by Benjamin Krohmal

The Times of India on June 15th reported the implementation of a policy that gives the Indian government power over which foreigners may be invited to and what topics may be discussed at international academic symposia. University administrators first learned of the new requirements when private notices were sent in January. However, many in the Indian scholarly community were not aware of the nine month old policy, which was quietly approved by the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs in September 2000, until the press first covered the issue in mid-June. The revelation has prompted outrage over what many view as a violation of the Constitutional rights of scholars and an impediment to academic freedom.

Under the new policy, any group or institution planning an international academic conference dealing with "technical subjects" or on the topics of politics, religion, human rights, or communalism must first submit a detailed itinerary and guest list to be approved by the Ministry of Home Affairs. If the Ministry, which is responsible for domestic security, does not approve of a conference's subject matter or guest list, the conference can be rejected without the possibility of an appeal. Furthermore, all academic conferences that plan to host scholars from Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, Sri Lanka, or Afghanistan, regardless of subject matter, will require approval. In evaluating a conference for approval, the Ministry of Home Affairs will consider whether the subject matter of the proposed symposium is potentially inflammatory and whether foreign attendees are likely to promote dangerous views or obtain sensitive information.

The Ministry has defended the policy as being in the interest of national security. The five countries that are specifically targeted are all nations with which India has strained relations. India has waged two wars against Pakistan, and is currently engaged in border disputes with Pakistan, China, and Bangladesh. The Indian government believes that Sri Lanka and Afghanistan harbor groups that pose a terrorist threat.

The Ministry's web page cites India's "fragmented social fabric," a reference to India's numerous separatist groups, ongoing caste conflicts, and religious and ethnic turmoil, as a further threat to national security. It is this threat that the Ministry hopes to address by restricting the attendance of scholars even from non-sensitive nations at symposia on controversial topics. Dinanath Shenoy, an undersecretary at the Ministry, explains that the restrictions are needed because "we have a secular democracy and we don't want communal and inter-religious flashes to take place."

The vast majority of Indian academics, however, have not accepted the Ministry's justification. Many argue that the policy is a violation of the right to free speech clause in the Indian Constitution, which the Indian Supreme Court has ruled is indicative of an implied "right to know." In order for the policy to legally infringe upon such a right, the government must demonstrate that the policy addresses a clear threat to national security; something that many scholars believe has yet to be done.

Many worry that the restrictions will be profoundly detrimental to the Indian academic community and Indian society as a whole. There is concern that Indian institutions planning symposia will opt not to invite foreign scholars from any background, so broadly defined are the grounds for denying approval. There is also concern that foreign institutions that once would have opted to hold symposia in India will now hold their conferences elsewhere. In either case, the exchange of ideas between Indian academics and the global scholarly community will be hampered.

The Ministry of Home Affairs maintains that the restrictions, limited to a handful of the most controversial topics and scholars from the most sensitive nations, are a small price to pay for security. However, concerns in the Indian scholarly community about rights violations and the health of academia in India, compounded by frustration over the secrecy with which the policy was enacted, have prompted India's Democratic Teachers Front and the Delhi University Teacher's Association to demand that the policy be rescinded. Opponents of the policy argue that by restricting the flow of knowledge into India, the Ministry of Home Affairs has created a far greater threat to national security than that posed by any scholarly conference.

Questions

• Are India's national security concerns legitimate in this case? If so, is the security benefit provided by the policy great enough to offset the negative effect of restricting academic freedom?
  
  
• The grounds outlined in the policy for rejecting a conference are broad enough that if the Ministry chose to exercise the full extent of its prohibitive powers it could reject virtually all international conferences. On the other hand, preexisting laws of this type, such as a law requiring Indian academics to seek government clearance to attend conferences in other countries, are very rarely enforced. If this particular policy is kept in place, to what extent will the Ministry of Home Affairs exercise its authority to reject conferences?
  
  
• What could be the effect of restricting international conferences on the Indian academic community?
  
  
• How should members of the worldwide academic community respond to this policy?

References

1. Constable, Pamela. "In India, Police Keep Tabs on Overnight Guests." The Boston Globe, June 24th, 2001.
2. Nayar, Kuldip. "Curbs on Contacts." The Hindu, March 24th, 2001
3. Overland, Martha Ann. "India Places Restrictions on Visits by Foreign Scholars in 4 Fields." The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 20th, 2001.
4. "Teachers Protest Circular on Foreign Scholars." The Times of India, June 16, 2001.
5. Varadarajan, Siddharth. "Scholars Chafe at Official Curbs." The Times of India, June 16, 2001.