A friend recently asked me for my views on the ongoing protest at Jantar Mantar. When I remained silent, he remarked that he had been waiting for my comment for several days. I gave him my usual response: "I have long since given up the task of saving the country." Smiling, he replied that he had heard this many times before and asked me to explain.
I told him that since the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, I have consciously withdrawn from active political engagement. I no longer participate in political activities, issue political statements, attend or comment on protests, demonstrations, public meetings, or marches. I have also almost stopped attending meetings and seminars. So why, I asked, should anyone expect my opinion? I am neither a civil society activist nor a journalist, nor do I head any NGO.
My friend responded, "At the very least, you are a citizen. And since 2019, the Bharat Samvad Abhiyan has been working to promote civic consciousness in the country."
That is true. As a citizen, I continue to write occasional commentaries on political, economic, social, cultural, educational, and other public issues. This protest would certainly have found a place in my next commentary. At my friend's insistence, however, I am putting down a few thoughts now.
The first point concerns the violent police action against protesters during the Parliament March on 20 July. There should be a fast-track, impartial investigation into the incident, and strict legal action must be taken against those police officers and personnel found responsible. Such an inquiry should also revisit the police violence against students inside the campus, library, and hostels of Jamia Millia Islamia University in December 2019. Both incidents deserve the highest degree of seriousness and accountability. Given the gravity of these events, it would be appropriate for the Supreme Court of India to take cognizance of the matter and either order an independent inquiry or direct the government to constitute one.
Secondly, Indian education has been pushed into a deep crisis over the past three decades of the neoliberal era. The protesters and those supporting them should be careful not to reduce the crisis in education to irregularities in the examination system for professional courses alone. Such a narrow focus risks overshadowing the larger struggle against the privatization, commercialization, and communalization of education. It is worth noting that neither Sonam Wangchuk nor the founders of the CJP have been associated with the long-standing ideological and practical movements resisting the marketization of education and the transformation of education into a commercial enterprise.
Thirdly, opposition political parties should be asked to make a clear public commitment that, if they come to power, democratic spaces such as Jantar Mantar, Ramlila Maidan, and Rajghat will no longer be fenced off by barricades; that peaceful rallies and marches in Delhi and other cities will not face arbitrary restrictions; that seminars, discussions, and public lectures in auditoriums and seminar halls will not require police permission; and that police will not enjoy unrestricted access to college and university campuses.
The resignation of the Union Education Minister has altered the immediate political context of the protest. Yet the larger issues remain unresolved. Leadership changes, by themselves, do not address the structural problems of the examination system or the deeper crisis in education. Genuine reforms will require transparency, accountability, and sustained public engagement.
While it may take time to achieve meaningful reforms in the examination system, the opposition can immediately commit itself to restoring democratic freedoms that are essential for the health of the republic. Such a commitment would be an important step toward reversing the steady erosion of democratic space in India.
---
**Dept. of Hindi, University of Delhi; Former Fellow, Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla
Comments