Anushka Kahandagamage
(Initially published in The Island, 27th of January 2025: https://island.lk/a-conversation-that-cannot-be-delayed/amp/)
The recent cancellation of the lecture ‘How to Fight Against the IMF Austerity Program,’ organized by the International Youth and Students for Social Equality (IYSSE-Sri Lanka) at the University of Peradeniya, sparked a buzz about academic freedom in the country—though not to a significant extent.
In Sri Lanka, academic freedom is a topic that is rarely discussed and often understood in a limited sense, which diminishes its significance. However, I believe academic freedom is closely linked to the overall spirit and practice of democracy in society and should be integrated into the education system not only at the tertiary level, but also at earlier stages of education.
The discourse
The discourse on academic freedom, as I understand it, is closely tied to the entire education system. Violations of academic freedom can occur due to factors such as the privatization of education, militarization of education, cuts to the budget for the humanities and social sciences, politicization of the university system, and issues related to gender and diversity, among others. Together, these factors can create an ecosystem in which academic freedom is at serious risk.
State Interference and Politicisation
One of the most pervasive forms of violating academic freedom is state interference in academic matters and the politicization of universities. The state can intervene in the university system at various levels, such as threatening academics who speak out against the government or other nation states with close ties to it, especially when those states are involved in human rights abuses and war. At the same time, discouraging and banning research which are seen as a threat to the existing power structures or creating an eco-system in which scholars are scared to conduct research and write on specific themes.
Another form of politicisation of universities that also impacts academic freedom is the direct and indirect interference of state and professors in authority in the recruitment process. The decline in the standards of faculty recruitments is a pressing concern within the academic landscape. University academic departments, if which many come under humanities and social sciences, increasingly adopt the practice of recruiting individuals with bachelor’s degrees for positions as lecturers and assistant lecturers. Sri Lanka stands out as possibly one of the very few countries in South Asia where individuals, armed only with a bachelor’s degree, can commence teaching sociology or any other discipline in universities and oversee dissertation research at the undergraduate level. This shift in recruitment practices has consequences for the academic rigor within university departments. These recruitments are often based on favoritism from academics in positions of power or political interference. They are frequently made to bring in passive academics who are submissive to the system and have little understanding of what academic freedom truly means.
Privatisation of Education
While the privatization of education has been a topic of discussion in many left-wing academic circles for a long time, a solution does not seem imminent or likely in the near future. Privatisation will affect the autonomy of the education at all levels, setting the agendas relevant to market forces and obstructing critical and innovative thinking, which foster human values and challenge the foundation of market-driven society and forms of authoritarianism. Further, privatisation of education undermines academic freedom, as its focus is to maintain the exploitative capitalist system and justify it.
Budget Cuts in Humanities and Social Sciences
All over the world, Humanities and Social Sciences departments of Universities are facing budget cuts. Whenever there is a deficit of funds, universities tend to eliminate some departments and reduce the size of those within the Humanities and Social Sciences by laying off faculty and cutting budgets. For example, in 2022, I experienced the consequences of budget cuts to the humanities firsthand, when the University of Otago, which I was attending at the time, was struggling with funding. It affected many departments within the Humanities and Social Sciences. These are forms of violating academic freedom—the freedom to study and research subjects that students and faculty are passionate about, and for academics to have stable careers. However, by eliminating some departments from the university system or reducing the capacity of departments within the Humanities and Social Sciences, the very concept of academic freedom becomes invisible within the system.
Militarisation of Education
Militarisation of education and academic freedom lies in contrast to each other. Militarizing education will have serious consequences. On one hand, it will diminish the value of other knowledge systems. On the other hand, military institutions will foster compliance rather than critical thinking, producing citizens who unquestioningly obey authority and power. This shift would lead to a society where injustice goes unchallenged and human rights violations become commonplace. This is particularly concerning because education in this situation will play a crucial role in shaping ideologies that reinforce military structures. The public’s understanding of what is ‘common sense’ would be conditioned by military values. Against a background where military institutions are handling or influencing higher education, the idea of academic freedom will diminish. For an example, in any country, the military will generally align itself with the state. In this kind of situation, research which may be critical of the authoritarian state will not take place within the premises of territory education institutes, which are run by the military. The same applies more generally to all other territory education entities in countries under heavy military influence.
New Normal
The lack of updated knowledge within academic institutions often leads to an environment where critical thinking is marginalized, and discussions on academic freedom are suppressed, erased or the university community is unaware of its existence. When faculty and students are not encouraged or equipped with the latest knowledge, they are less able to critically engage with contemporary issues or challenge the status quo. This stifles the kind of intellectual inquiry that is central to academic freedom.
In Sri Lanka, there is a growing trend of uncritical thinking becoming the norm, both among academics and students. Many academics, particularly those in positions of authority, are reluctant to voice opinions that challenge the prevailing political, social, or economic systems, or rather they intend and make an effort to sustain the very system which supress the critical thinking. This is partly due to fear of political or institutional repercussions, and partly because many have become accustomed to a system where conformity has become the easy way and is also profitable socially and financially.
Students, who are following in the footsteps of their passive and unvocal professors, lack, even the mere ability to see the injustice of the system and to understand the importance of academic freedom. Instead of becoming creative and responsive critical thinkers, these students would more likely choose the easy way: get the degree certificate and leave the university. This lack of intellectual challenge diminishes the role of universities as spaces for critical thought and social progress, effectively erasing important conversations about academic freedom, democracy, and justice.
Against this backdrop of silence, submissive academics are becoming the new norm. In societies like ours, which are healing from institutionalized violence are deeply undemocratic, and have experienced widespread human rights violations from both the state and other parties, constant dialogue and action are needed to foster a healthy democracy and intellectual growth. As academic freedom diminishes, so does the capacity for meaningful discourse and social change. Without a vibrant exchange of ideas, universities become less places of learning and more sites of conformity, where questioning the system is seen as dangerous or unnecessary.