 |
| Rajdeep Sardesai, Anand Yagnik |
This is a continuation of my earlier blog on well-known journalist Rajdeep Sardesai's lecture in memory of the late Achyut Yagnik at the Ahmedabad Management Association (AMA). I was a little surprised when I received the intimation about the venue for the lecture.
In Ahmedabad, as in the rest of Gujarat, it is generally not easy to secure a space for a lecture by someone whom the establishment considers anti-Narendra Modi, and Sardesai is no exception. I have attended lectures at AMA featuring individuals who are disliked by those in power. However, they are usually warned in advance to be cautious and to avoid saying anything that might offend the authorities.
One such speaker, about whose AMA lecture in 2022 I had written, was Prof. Kaushik Basu—a top-notch economist, former Chief Economic Advisor to the Manmohan Singh government, and former Chief Economist of the World Bank. He was extremely cautious when discussing topics on which he is otherwise known to be outspoken.
During the Q&A session, I asked Prof. Basu directly whether he believed India was slipping into hypernationalism and, if so, what its impact on the Indian economy would be. He had previously spoken about hypernationalism in Argentina and how it had harmed its economy.
Prof. Basu replied that there was certainly a "risk" but refused to elaborate further. A little later, he referred to hypernationalism in the U.S. under McCarthyism in the early 1950s, adding that the country had overcome the phenomenon before it was too late, allowing its economy to survive.
Indeed, Prof. Basu remained cautious when speaking about India. Was he advised not to comment directly on India in a negative manner? It would seem so, judging by what Prof. Kirit Parikh, another top economist who chaired the session, said. He remarked that Prof. Basu's lecture at AMA was delivered to a "private audience" and lamented how free speech in India today is under stress, with critics of the present government facing seditious charges.
.webp) |
| Prof Kaushik Basu |
Anand noted that, until recently, dissenting views could still be expressed at institutions like the Mahatma Gandhi-founded Gujarat Vidyapeeth and the Sabarmati Ashram, which served as Gandhi’s karmabhoomi during the early years of the freedom movement until 1933. However, even these places are no longer available for open discourse, reflecting the severe curbs on freedom of speech in Ahmedabad, he stressed.
What he said next stunned Rajdeep: that the entire state of Gujarat has been under Section 144 for the last ten years, meaning that gatherings of more than four people for protests are prohibited. Rajdeep was so taken aback that he tweeted the following:
"You learn new things every day in life. While having the honour of delivering the Achyut Yagnik memorial lecture in Ahmedabad on media and democracy, I was reminded by the organisers that Gujarat has Section 144 orders across 33 districts CONTINUOUSLY in place since July 2015, when the Patidar agitation first took place. It has not been officially lifted for 10 YEARS!"
He added:
"Please digest this: for almost a decade now, Gujarat has Section 144 in place, giving the police enormous powers to stop any gathering of more than four people or any protest. Let me reiterate: for almost 10 YEARS, Gujarat has had Section 144 enforced across the state!"
Was Gujarat already a police state? Is that the conclusion Rajdeep and Anand were seeking to reach? And would th tweet have any impact? Or it would be just ignored as one more critique sought to be set aside by the Gujarat government?
Let's wait and see...
Comments