‘An academician should seek the truth and academic freedom doesn’t allow any academician or body to lie about their data’.
New Delhi
The self-assured hubris among so-called liberal academicians can not only take us down a destructive path, but also greatly harm the future of a democracy and coming generations, say critics as the ferment in Ashoka University, a private university, deepens following a number of resignations, including that of the assistant professor at the centre of the ruckus. As his colleagues raise the flag of “academic freedom”, experts shoot down the bogey saying “academicians should seek the truth, and not peddle half-truths”.
“Rigidity is where the problem lies. In the name of being liberal, you should not peddle half-truths,” Chairman of New Delhi-based think-tanks “Law and Society Alliance” and “Indian Strategic Interests Foundation” N.C. Bipindra told The Sunday Guardian.
“Sabyasachi Das made a mistake, he applied wrong theories while assessing his research paper ‘Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy’,” said Bipindra. There is a problem with the paper, let him admit it, accept the scrutiny it deserves, echoed several other experts including a professor from another private university in the NCR, who did not wish to be named.
“There is always an opportunity to revise and correct and set things right. It is just the beginning of Das’ career, so there is no need to be finicky. The conclusion many times goes wrong, there is always an opportunity to revise it,” Bipindra said.
The job of an academician is to seek the truth. “You take up a hypothesis and collect data, but your conclusion may also go against your hypothesis in the end result. So, he should be open minded to revise his conclusion. Essentially, an academician should speak the truth and not peddle half-truths,” he added.
“Criticism is part of academic freedom, isn’t it? Peer review of the paper needs to happen, first and foremost and then it should be publicly debated. If there is a genuine mistake he has committed, he should accept it, relook and revise. That is how an academic goes about his work. You shouldn’t be rigid about it,” said the author and think tanker. Das in his research claimed to have found statistical evidence of targeted electoral discrimination against Muslims, and alleged that it was partly facilitated by weak monitoring by official election observers, leading to more votes being polled for the BJP.
In a paper that is a type of data analysis that can be called election forensics, Das used statistics to check if election results were legit. Associate Professor of Economics at Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi, Mudit Kapoor, in his critique of Das’ paper, said: “The statistical findings of the paper do not support the claims in the paper.”
Das himself is also careful to clarify that he does not claim that the manipulation changed the outcome of the election and said: “The paper is unable to comment on the overall extent of manipulation in the 2019 general election.” Bipindra said when Das admits the findings are not conclusive, “then why is anybody supporting it, or pressuring the university to take him back, if he has resigned of his own accord?”
Das’ colleagues have written to the Governing Body of the Haryana-based institute, threatening faculty exodus if he is not reinstated with an apology. The English and Creative Writing departments have also extended their support to the demand. Everything has been dramatic about “Democracy Backsliding…” right from its title to its dramatic X (former Twitter) debut on 31 July, summarising a work-in-progress research that unleashed a political storm and this histrionic continues after Das’ resignation a day ahead of Independence Day.
Days after Das, Pulapre Balakrishnan, another professor in the Economics department, has put in his papers. The Ashoka faculty has also pressed for an Academic Freedom Committee to be instituted. “The academic freedom bogey that they are raising at this point of time is bogus. This academic freedom does not allow any academician or body to lie about their data and provide wrong information. That is where Das has gone wrong, and that is precisely why other academicians shouldn’t align with him. For, if it is an ideological battle, then it should be fought ideologically, and not using such pressure tactics,” said Bipindra.
Das’ paper never underwent peer review. It landed on social media and entered the political discourse. So, experts point out that the economist should have been prepared for public scrutiny and should have been ready for questions before quitting.
Kanchan Gupta, Senior Adviser, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Government of India, New Delhi, said on X: “Ashoka University is a private institution. Parents pay huge fees. Faculty has to be accountable, answerable, responsible. It is not their divine right to live off others’ money and do whatever they wish.” Gupta reminded that similar threats of dire consequences were raised when former Reserve Bank of India (RBI) chairman Raghuram Rajan was not given an extension. “Our Left liberal ‘intellectuals’ lack imagination,” he added. The university has already distanced itself from the paper by Das published on the Social Science Research Network on 25 July that argued that the BJP won a disproportionate share of closely contested parliamentary seats in 2019 Lok Sabha polls, especially in states where it was the ruling party at the time.