Scientists, academicians protest cancellation of discussion on UAPA: ‘Your actions have damaged IISc’s reputation’

In a letter sent Monday morning, a copy of which The Indian Express has seen, the signatories, including 21 faculty members of IISc, expressed “dismay at the actions taken by the IISc administration to stop a discussion on the ‘Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, Prisons and the Criminal Justice System’ that was to be led by Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita on June 28.”

Narwal and Kalita were arrested in May 2020 for their alleged role in the Northeast Delhi riots conspiracy case and were later booked under the UAPA. The Delhi High Court had granted them bail a year later saying “it seems, that in its anxiety to suppress dissent, in the mind of the State, the line between the constitutionally guaranteed right to protest and terrorist activity seems to be getting somewhat blurred.

The Indian Express has learned that on June 27, the IISc Registrar, Sridhar Warrier, intervened and cancelled the event that was scheduled to be held at the Center for Continuing Education (CCE) for which student organisers had obtained permission from the CCE chair. This action was taken on the grounds that the organisers should have sought permission from the institute administration and not just the department.

An email sent to the IISc Registrar on June 30 seeking comments and clarification on the events that transpired a day before the discussion and the process for seeking permission for organising events on campus did not elicit a response. Narwal did not wish to comment on the matter and requested this reporter to contact the organisers. The newspaper could not reach Kalita for a comment.

Shairik Sengupta, one of the student organisers of the discussion and a member of the ‘Break The Silence’ group at IISc, told the newspaper that such intervention (by the Registrar) is unusual since students generally require permission only from the department where the event is to be held.

After the cancellation, the organisers substituted the discussion with an informal interaction outside the Sarvam Complex, a canteen at IISc. “At this point, the administration dispatched members of the security team to disperse this informal gathering. It was only after the intervention of members of the IISc faculty that the security team backtracked,” states the letter signed by over 500 scientists, academicians and students.

Suvrat Raju, a faculty member at the International Centre for Theoretical Sciences (ICTS) of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), who was present for the informal discussion on June 28 and a signatory to the letter, said, “This is the height of paranoia since an academic institution should be a place where people can really talk and discuss different things.”

“We believe that it is important for members of IISc to hear about Natasha and Devangana’s experience and to reflect on the laws that were used to incarcerate them. Regardless of one’s perspective, such discussions are crucial in a functioning democracy and IISc, as an academic institution, is ideally positioned to host them. Conversely, if the institute is unwilling to permit peaceful discussions on constitutional questions, it is hard to see how it can foster a spirit of critical inquiry that is necessary for scientific work,” the letter further states.

The letter addressed to the IISc director also mentions that the cancellation of the discussion mars the reputation of IISc, nationally and internationally. It ends by saying, “We hope that you will take urgent corrective measures and ensure that members of IISc remain free to express and discuss a range of ideas, both about science and about the society that we live in.”

Of the 543 signatories to the letter, about 280 are faculty members from different institutes including IISc, Chennai Mathematical Institute, Indian Institute of Astrophysics, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, IIT Kanpur, IIT Bombay, IISER Pune, IISER Mohali, IISER Kolkata and Indian Statistical Institute, among others. The letter, however, clarifies that the institutional affiliations have been provided only for purposes of identification and that the signatures do not reflect the views of these institutes. About 110 of the signatories are students and postdoctoral fellows.