Resignation Letter _ Apoorvanand
To
Professor
Muchkund Dubey
President,
Council For Social Development
Sub:
Resignation from the post of Editor, Samajik Vimarsh
7 October 2017
Respected
Sir,
This letter
is to inform you of my decision to resign from the post of Editor, Samajik
Vimarsh, the Hindi journal of the CSD, proposed to be published in
collaboration with Sage Publications.
I had been
contemplating doing so for the last six months after I noticed attempts by the
CSD administration to interfere in the working of the editorial team of the
journal and usurp its powers. Till now, going against my own instincts I had restrained
myself from taking this step.
I tried to
explain to you personally our editorial policy. I went out of my way to share
with you and your team the content of the journal and the rationale behind the
selection of the articles. I had expected the administration to see reason.
Yesterday I realised that I was wrong.
The letter
by the Director, CSD to Ms. Neetu Kalra of Sage Publications, asking her to
withhold the publication of the journal’s inaugural issue, has convinced me
that the administration is simply not interested in its publication and is
trying to wriggle out of its commitment using various technicalities. The
reason given in the mail by the Director is that a legal issue has arisen as the
journal is being published without the approval of the Registrar of Newspapers
and this needs to be resolved before the journal is published.
The letter
in itself is improper as it bypasses not only the editors but also Prof.
Manoranjan Mohanty, the Vice President of the CSD who is now the Head of the
Research and Publications Committee. He has been supervising the functioning of
the journal on behalf of the CSD administration and is in regular touch with both
editors and the publisher. The letter was rushed to Sage without even informing
the editors and the head, RPC, let alone consulting them. It breaks the chain
of command and has for all practical purposes made the editorial team and the
Head of the RPC redundant.
You were
aware that Sage took a decision to go ahead with the publication of the journal,
while pursuing its request for the RNI number ten days ago. Accordingly it had informed
the editorial team that it would like to bring out the inaugural number in 2017
itself. It had waited for more than a year for the RNI number and believed that
after securing the title ‘Samajik Vimarsh’ it could go ahead with its
publication. Sage is an international publisher and brings out numerous journals
in collaboration with institutions across countries. It is inconceivable that
it would even think of committing any illegality for the sake of one journal.
It must have consulted its legal team before going ahead with the publication
of the journal, while the registration process was underway.
We, as part
of the editorial team, have been waiting patiently for the last one year for
clearance from Sage. The journal should have been launched in January, 2017
itself. The first edition of the journal was ready and papers and articles for
the next two also had been finalised so that the schedule could be strictly
followed. But the title was not secured and it was impossible to publish the
journal with a proposed or tentative title. So, the publishers decided to work
with the governmental agencies to expedite the process.
We were
informed two months ago that finally the title had been cleared by the
concerned agency. Ten days ago we were told by the publishers that they have
decided to print the first issue while pursuing for the registration number.
They asked us to immediately submit the manuscript of the first edition of the
journal.
We decided
to drop one article as it had become slightly dated and the author could not
have revised it at such a short notice. We brought an article from the second
number to meet the deadline and submitted the manuscript.
Subsequently,
I wrote to you for your message to the contributors and readers of the journal
as the Head of the CSD. Next morning I called you to remind you that we were
expecting your message. Then I found you reluctant. You said that apparently
the publishers were bringing out only the web edition of the journal and this
was not acceptable to you. I told you that this was not the case and the
publishers were committed to bring out the journal both in print and online.
You did not sound convinced and said that the intent and decision of the CSD
was to have a printed journal in Hindi like its English counterpart and it
would be very difficult for the CSD to invest its resources only to have a
virtual journal. This issue had never come up earlier before us.
As a result,
I asked Sage to put it on record that the journal would be brought out both in
print and online. With their assurance in this regard I went to you again
requesting you to write your message as the journal edition was being closed.
Then you raised the issue of the journal’s registration number. I shared with
you the letter by Ms. Neetu Kalra in which she had informed us that the journal
could be published as the title had been secured and they would keep working
with the concerned government department to obtain the registration number.
After having seen their letter you promised me to give your message the
following day.
When I went
to you yesterday for the message you told me that you had decided to withhold
the publication as you were not sure whether the content of the journal
complied with the guidelines of the editorial advisory body and also if the
publication of the journal without the registration number would be legal or
not. You told me that you would consult with the head of the RPC and also the
general body members available in the town on Monday to take a final decision
regarding the publication of the journal. This was a completely new situation
which was disturbing for me.
Barely five
minutes after my meeting with you I found an email in my inbox from the Director
informing the publishers about your decision to put on hold the publication of
the journal. The letter was copied to me and the managing editor Shri Dhruva
Narayan along with you and Prof. Mohanty.
This letter
convinced me that the administration had little regard for the process of
discussion and consultation. Unilateral decisions were being taken bypassing
the concerned people. The promise of a discussion after the decision has been
taken makes the whole thing a farce.
It need not
be said that public-ness of an institution can only be ensured by respecting
institutional processes and having regard for the autonomy of individual units constituting
the institution.
This apart, I
have reason to believe that the administration has real discomfort with the
journal and the editorial team.
On more than
one occasion I was told that the ideological leanings of the editorial team
were responsible for the delay in the registration of the journal. Apparently the
contents of the journal were thought to be anti-government and also the reason
for the governmental agencies not granting the registration number or delaying
it. I was also told there was an impression that the contributors belonged to a
particular line of thought and there was no diversity of viewpoints.
To be fair
to you, you quite frankly told me that you would not like to put CSD in trouble
by inviting the wrath of the government by publishing matter critical to it at
this stage when it had adopted a vindictive stance vis-a-vis its critics. You
as head of the institution had a larger responsibility to ensure its survival
and you could not be expected to preside over its liquidation for the sake of a
journal.
I did not
agree with you but could appreciate your dilemma. You were kind enough to
invite me to edit the journal and also accept my suggestion of having Shri
Dhruva Narayan as its managing editor. You knew me, my ideological and
intellectual position very well before reposing your faith in me. You were also
aware of the ideological stance of Shri Dhruva Narayan as he had published your
book earlier. Knowing us fully well you took the risk of giving us the
editorial responsibility of the journal in an atmosphere in which the
government was brazenly targeting organisations and individuals it was
suspicious of.
The CSD does
not have a corpus large enough to sustain itself without grants from the state
agencies. It has to tread with care. I shared this concern. I explained to you
that the journal was never intended to be an anti-government platform. It was
not a forum for people to express their political opinion. The idea behind the
journal was to address the lack of serious, rigorous social science scholarship
in Hindi. It was a peer reviewed journal and committed to give space not only
to diverse viewpoints but also to expose young scholars to different methods. The
government of the day cannot be the sole reference point for ideation and
scholarly pursuit. We are against regimentation of thought, be it from left or
right or even from those who claim to be liberals but are intolerant to views
which are different from theirs.
Let me say
that I found it slightly strange that an impression that the articles were anti-government
was even entertained. How could such an opinion be formed without even knowing
the contents of the articles is beyond me. But when it persisted I decided
again to clear the air by sharing with you the abstracts of the papers, the
names of the reviewers, which I should not have disclosed to anybody.
I am a
person of compromises. I prefer to go extra mile to keep people with me. So, in
this case, leaving editorial pride aside, I discussed all the articles with
you. Even after this meeting, the administration continued to be suspicious.
The RPC was told that matter going into the journal needed to be vetted.
Our
editorial advisory team is itself comprised of scholars of repute, belonging to
different disciplines and impeccable scholarly credentials. We drew our
editorial policy in consultation with them and with your approval we gave it the
final shape. Keeping the aims and scope of the journal in mind, we commissioned
papers and articles from young and established scholars of differing shades.
The peer review process was strictly followed. Authors accepted and revised
their papers after the feedback and we as editors exercised our discretion when
necessary.
It is not a
practice anywhere in the world for editors to get the articles of their journal
vetted and cleared by the editorial advisory body. Otherwise the body turns
into a censor board and the editors lose their authority and autonomy. They are
reduced to being clerks of the advisory body.
The office
of the editor cannot be diminished in this manner. Let me recall the meeting of
the editorial team of the Social Change, the CSD administration and the representatives
of Sage held in July, 2017. In that meeting the Director had proposed that the contents
of journal should be run past the Advisory body. This proposal was rejected
forthright saying that the authority and autonomy of the editor cannot be
compromised.
I fail to
understand why the principle, which is accepted for the conduct of the journal
in English is not good for another journal published in Hindi by the same
institution. Is it because Hindi requires paternalistic supervision as it is
thought to be generally excitable?
Let me also
put on record that we had initiated some activities to support the journal,
which involved no extra costs. They included monthly discussions with young
scholars, a Samajik colloquium, etc. But all this was discouraged and stalled.
As I have
said before I understand the constraints that the present political situation
has put on all academic institutions. It is perfectly understandable that they
choose not to confront the government and decide to survive for better days. It
is not for me, nor do I have any authority to suggest to CSD how it should
function. But recalling your trust and affection you have given me, I would
like to request you to not to let administrative suspicions fetter the workers
you choose.
It is sad to
see however that institutions give way even without a blow. The recent case of
buckling down of the EPW Trust in anticipation of a legal threat and removal of
its Editor is still fresh in our memory.
I would only
say this very humbly that courage should not be reserved only for extraordinary
occasions. We need to practise every moment, has to be made an everyday thing,
a routine. It is not enough for the government to be asked to follow democratic
norms. When we ourselves start self-censorship, we allow corrosion of
democracy. Struggle for democracy is not without a cost either. In situations
like this I am reminded of a line by the poet Dhumil: काँख भी ढँकी रहे और
मुट्ठी भी तनी रहे.
Since we had been interacting with the authors and
the wider academic community on behalf of the journal, we will need to put our
decision to disassociate with the journal in public domain.
I would like
to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to you for having thought of
me and putting your faith in me by inviting me to edit the journal. I hope that
this single incident would not deprive me of your affection which you have
bestowed on me so generously.
I am deeply
grateful to Prof. Manoranjan Mohanty for patiently guiding us and negotiating
with Sage on our behalf whenever it was needed.
I thank the
administrative and academic staff of the CSD for their support during my time
as Editor of the Hindi journal.
Thanking you
again,
With sincere
regards,
Apoorvanand
No comments:
Post a Comment