fineartsfacultymsu

GUJARAT GOVERNER APPOINTS AFACT FINDING COMMITTEE TO EXAMINE MS UNIVERSITY INCIDENT

2007-07-16T01:15:00.000+05:30

GUJARAT GOVERNER APPOINTS AFACT FINDING COMMITTEE TO EXAMINE MS UNIVERSITY INCIDENTGandhinagar: Dt 12-7-2007: Thursday: As the first step towards resolving the crisis prevailing in the MS University, Vadodara following the incidents of alleged attack upon its fine arts faculty by so-called ‘moral police’ on May 9th 2007 and the subsequent developments, Gujarat Governeor Shri Nawal Kishore Sharma as the Visitor of Maharaja Sayajirao University, Vadodara has appointed a three members committee to find out the facts relating to the incidents.The Committee consisting of Prof. Y.K. Alagh, Chairman IRMA as its convenor and Prof Sudarshan Iyengar, Vice Chancellor, Gujarat Vidyapith and Shri Hakubhai Shah, eminent artist and art critic as members would carry out detailed examination of facts, the role and behaviour of different functionaries and authorities of the MSU and suggest measure for amicable solution of the existing crisis and long term measures to prevent such incidents from re-occuring in future, the committee is expected to submit its report at theearliest preferably within three weeks.It is to be recalled that the incident in question occurred at t Fine Arts Students work display during their annual examination on May 9th, 2007. A so called ‘moral police’ group reportedly led by Shri Niraj Jain protested against certain artworks as hurting the sentiments of faith and decency of the society. In the process, in-charge dean, other staff members and students were allegedly abused and threatened and final year student Shri Chandra Mohan and Shri Venkat Rao were arrested. Five exhibits were also removed and sealed as reportedly asked by Police. Prof Shivaji Panikkar, in-charge Dean of the faculty was suspended without framing charges or following procuedure on May 10th, 2007 and stopped from entering into the University.A number of organizations and citizens, artists, University teachers, human right activists and students protesting th incidents approached Gujarat Governor as Visitor of MSU to seek his help to resolve the crisis. On due considerations on the above representations, the Governor found it expedient to first have the facts ascertained before deciding to invke his powers as Visitor of the MS University toinstitute a statuory inquiry into the incidents. The Governor, therefore, has appointed the above Fact Finding Committee which would examine and ascertain among other things the issue of obscenity etc of the artworks in question, the role, conduct and behaviour of different university authorities and officals in handling the situation, action of suspension of the in-charge Dean Prof. Panikkar and related issues in details and submit its repot to the Governor soon.

STATEMENT OF FACTS BY SHABNAM HASHMI + dateline

2007-07-14T11:59:00.000+05:30

The MSU Syndicate in its meeting ratified the decision of VC on the suspension issue and has not taken any decision regarding the wide scale criticism over the composition of the Vice Chancellor’s Inquiry Committee which is presently investigating into the incidents at the Faculty of Fine Arts. Minutes and resolution to this effect issued on 7 June 2007
Professor Romila Thapar, Professor Jayati Ghosh, Professor Shivaji Panikkar and others address Press Conference organized by SAHMAT at Press Club, New Delhi on 29 May
On 5 June, the Registrar SMSed Professor Panikkar asking him to submit results of various papers being examined at the graduate and post graduate examinations and allowing him permission to enter the campus for this purpose. Professor Panikkar replied that as per law he could submit results only if the suspension was withdrawn. The Registrar clarified that the suspension had not been withdrawn but urged Professor Panikkar to submit results anyway. Professor Panikkar then reiterated that as per law it was illegal to discharge any official responsibility while under suspension. Recently, in spite of the legal clarifications offered, Professor Panikkar has yet again been asked to submit results by the Registrar.
On 9 June, staff members of the Faculty gave the Governor, in his capacity as a Visitor to the University, a Memorandum that apprised him of the situation. The primary demands of the staff members were the following:

An FIR be lodged by the University authorities against Niraj Jain and associates for intruding into the University premises without permission.
The attached artworks be released forthwith to enable the completion of evaluation and declaration of result
The suspension of i/c Dean, Professor Shivaji K Panikkar who was the only University authority who attempted to prevent the disruption of examinations, protect the students and redress their grievances, be revoked unconditionally with immediate effect.
That the Governor, as the Visitor to the University, intervene and set up an inspection into all the official actions taken by the university authorities with regard to the Faculty of Fine Arts, as their actions clearly compromise the autonomy of the University and violate the sanctity and integrity of University education.
That appropriate action be initiated against the Vice Chancellor for abdication of responsibility towards the University at a critical moment, failure to take action against the intruders and disruption of the examination process.
To set up, in his Capacity as the Governor of Gujarat State, a Judicial Level committee to inquire into the entire events starting from the Fine Arts Faculty to the developments thereafter, like the announcement of a reward of Rs. 1 lakh for a nude portrait of Prophet Mohammed by Mr. Deepak Shah, a senate member of the University and the appearance of the nude portrait of Prophet Mohammed in the D.N, Hall in the main University Campus, that led to a riot-like situation in the Old City area of Vadodara.

Such an inquiry, the staff members felt was of prime importance particularly since there was a clear indication that a section of the public was actively trying not only to vitiate the atmosphere in the University but was also instigating and provoking religious clashes among people of various faiths. The students and Chandramohan also petitioned the Governor about the events that occurred in the Faculty of Fine Arts.

The University reopened. The strike by the students which was suspended on 14 May was restared. More than 150 students gathered at the Faculty ; huge banners were put up reiterating demands to file FIR against Niraj Jain, to revoke suspension of Shivaji Panikkar and protesting University apathy in general. The students continue the dharna at the Faculty till 21 May. The students wrote a letter of appeal to the general public elucidating their point of view, and highlighting Chandra Mohan’s position as a student. Their appeal was carried widely in the Gujarati papers- and the heartening thing was that the local opinion and the local media were and continue to be quite sympathetic.
The Staff members also decide to protest against University decisions regarding the Faculty, primarily the decision to suspend Professor Shivaji Panikkar. The Dean, Professor Deepak Kannal tried to mediate between the University authorities and the Faculty of Fine Arts but no headway was made.
A delegation of staff members meet the VC to discuss the issue on the 22 May but the talks are disappointing as the University position did not show any significant shift from that of 11 May. The teachers later apprise the Chancellor of the meeting between them and the VC on the 27 May. The students also stage a dharna at the University office on 22 May for the first time and hand over a memorandum stating their demands to the VC. They continue staging dharna at the University office till date. They made the following demands:

An FIR be filed against Mr. Niraj Jain and his associates by the University for disrupting the examination evaluation process and forcefully entering into the examination hall.
The confiscated works be returned to the students/Faculty with an immediate effect in order to complete the evaluation process.
Immediate and unconditional revocation of the suspension of Professor Shivaji K Panikkar.
Disbanding of the biased inquiry committee.

On 23 June, the alumni of the Faculty were invited by the students to paint on canvases to symbolize solidarity with students and staff of the Faculty. Senoir artists like Jyoti Bhatt, Gulammohammed Sheikh, Natraj Sharma and others participated. The Painting Department building was draped in black plastic to suggest the gagging of the Faculty.
On 25 June the Baroda University Teacher’s Union demanded the revocation of the suspension of Shivaji Panikkar and condemned the attack on Fine Arts and disruption of Exams on 9/May/07. Later, on 2 July, BUTA members met with the Governor and urged His Excellency to look into the matter.
The general University position so far has been that Professor Panikkar should write a note of explanation/apology and the University would revoke the suspension. This however would not entail the dissolution of the Inquiry Committee which would continue to function. Professor Panikkar has refused to do so. The Faculty position is that any revocation of the suspension order should be unconditional and with honor.
On 26 June, students asked the VC to respond to their demands listed out in the Memorandum that they had given earlier. The VC said that he had conveyed the response to the Dean. The Dean denied being informed anything by the University authorities. The students, not getting a satisfactory answer from the authorities, decide to go on a relay hunger strike. On 29 June 70 students sit on a mass token hunger strike. This is followed by relay hunger strike by 5 students a day. This has continued till date. From 4 July onwards, the Faculty staff have joined the students on the relay hunger strike.
On 2 July, a protest rally was taken to the University office. Twice the Vice Chancellor met student representatives. The V.C. refused to respond to the queries of the students and merely asked them to return to their classes. The next day, University officials lock the entry gate to the office. When protesting students sat in front of University gate locked by University officials, they were accused of obstructing the functioning of the office. Students relocated away from the gate. V.C. addressed the protesters and instructed them to leave. The police were called in to arrest the peaceful and silent protesters. All students (about 45) detained at Fatehgunj police station. Striking teachers arrive at police station to lend support. The students were let off at 6:00 pm
On 5 July, Dean Deepak Kannal along with Prof. Shivaji Panikkar, Vasudevan Akkitham, i/c Head of the Painting Department and S Santhosh, meet with University authorities negotiate the matter with disappointing results. Representatives of the University merely reiterate the earlier position of the authorities. The officials accused the Faculty of Fine Arts of malpractices within the campus.
The next day, 6 July students turn up at the Faculty in large numbers. BUTA members join students in hunger strike, more than 100 University teachers join the Dharna in support. Dean Deepak Kannal resigns in protest of University apathy.
Prof. Shivaji Panikkar assaulted in Ahmedabad on 6 July where he had gone to inaugurate a students’ poster exhibition on communal harmony. In what was clearly a pre-planned attack, Professor Panikkar’s taxi-cab was attacked by about 15-20 assailants carrying lathis, stones and bricks as well as an iron drum which was used to shatter the windshield, windows and smash the body of the car. Professor Panikkar was manhandled, but managed to escape. His driver, Vijay Rajput sustained injuries on his face, hand and neck. An unknown outfit called Hindu Samrajya Sena has claimed the attack. An FIR was filed at Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad. No arrests have been made so far, despite photographs of the attack being available.
On Saturday, 7 July, students block Faculty office in condemnation of the attack on Professor Shivaji Panikkar. Later students allow office staff to enter and then surround the office, stopping people from going in or out. The Registrar and Dy. Registrar ask the students to withdraw the protest. Students decline in the absence of concrete steps to resolve the issue. University releases Final year BFA students’ results. The next day, students along with staff members and Professor Shivaji Panikkar go to Ahmedabad to address meeting organized by All India Save Education Committee and appraise the gathering of the current situation.

STATEMENT OF FACTS BY SHABNAM HASHMI (ANHAD) ON THE AATACK BY THE SANGH PARIVAR ON JULY 6, 2007 AT ST XAVIER'S SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY

2007-07-14T11:56:00.000+05:30

Find herewith a detailed report by Shabnam Hashmi of
ANHAD, the organizer of the event. Shivaji K Panikkar

Anhad is organizing the National Student's Festival
for Peace, Communal Harmony and Justice (July 6-8,
2007) in Ahmedabad. The festival is showcasing the
selected entries from across India -60 paintings by
school children, 80 design entries by media students
and 45 student documentary films.

Anhad invited Prof. Shivji Panikkar to inaugurate the
Exhibition (at Father Erviti Memorial hall, St
Xavier's Social Service Society), and Nafisa Ali to
inaugurate the Student Video Documentary Film Festival
(Diamond Jubilee Auditorium, Loyola Hall, St Xavier's
High School Campus). The inauguration of the
exhibition was at 10.30. The exhibition of the Student
Film Festival was at 11.30pm.

I was waiting for Panikkar to come. Around 10.40, I
called him and he said he is about to reach. Nafisa
Ali had already arrived. After speaking to Nafisa for
a few minutes I walked towards the gate to receive
Panikkar. As I reached the gate of the Xavier's campus
I was shocked to see Panikkar's car surrounded by a
Mob. They were shouting slogans Panikkar go back.
Bharat mata ki jai …

I pushed myself inside the crowd and reached
Panikkar's car, the mob was throwing stones, one of
them threw a large rusted iron drum on the bonnet of
the car , the same drum was thrown again on the car ,
the drum cracked the front car glass . Sahir who had
by now reached and was just behind me, managed to take
away the drum from a goon's hand, and take it away, in
the process injuring himself. Two of the attackers
threw two bricks which broke the front glass, one of
the bricks hit the driver on the forehead.

All this happened at a very fast speed and it took me
sometime to come to senses. I stood near the door so
that mob could not drag out Panikkar which they were
trying to do and then I started shouting at the top of
my voice at the mob. For a few moments everything
stopped and they moved backwards. I told Panikkar and
the driver to take away the car at full speed as I as
an organizer was unable to guarantee any security. I
told them to rush to the nearest Police station. By
now the mob realised that they were trying to leave
and they tried to block the car from leaving and
continued to throw stones. Fortunately the driver
speeded up and was able to move away.

Gagan Sethi and Gauhar Raza, who were at the venue
immediately rushed to the Police station, Navrangpura
and told we informed Panikkar on the phone to go to
the same police station.

Mob had already broken all our festival hoardings
which were outside the gate. Now they forced their
entry into the compound raising slogans Modi amar
rahe, desh ke gaddaron wapas jao and bharat mata ki
jai ( all in Gujarat) and started breaking and
vandalising the display in the compound (outside the
exhibition hall) mobbed and threatened Sarup Ben,
Zakia Jowher, Bina ben (from aman samudaya) and me.
They used highly abusive, sexist and filthy language.
Their body language and gestures were highly
aggressive and vulgar. The attack on Bina , Zakia and
Sarup ben was of being 'gaddars' (traitors). The
attack on me was of insulting gujarati asmita being an
outsider and entering Gujarat. This continued for
about 20 minutes. Then suddenly a signal from one of
them( which later I realized was a police man from
local intelligence- who was part of the mob) that
police was coming, made all of them leave suddenly.

After the police arrived, the man in plain clothes was
standing with them and I went and told the police that
this man was part of the mob, which they ignored and
said he is from the police. Later in the police
station I again showed the man to the Police Inspector
Desai, but he also ignored it completely.

It was very clear that the attack was master minded by
the police and the BJP and the Sangh combine.

After the commotion was over around 12.30 we announced
that we will defer the opening of the exhibition.
Nafisa Ali inaugurated the Film Festival.

We went to the police station around 1 pm by now
Panikkar's FIR was being lodged. I spoke to Desai the
PI ( Police Inspector) and said I need to lodge an FIR
too, which he refused. We decided to return later with
the lawyer.

After all the formalities of Panikkar's FIR were over,
we took Panikkar to the exhibition under police
protection and inaugurated the exhibition around
2.30pm.

Then we called the lawyer, prepared the complaint and
meanwhile developed the photographs which were taken
of the mob.

We went to the police station around 5pm with the
lawyer and we were there almost till 9pm. The police
refused to file an FIR. I spoke to the Police
Commissioner on the phone I was told both by the PI
and the commissioner that we should have taken
permission from the police to holds the programme as
we were using loud speakers! We informed both of them
that the programme was inside the premises of an
institution, inside halls and not in a public place.
The PI said you can not show films. These are student
video documentaries, and for film lovers and students
by invitation.

It is very clear that by lodging the FIR from me on
Anhad's behalf, Police will have to arrest the members
of the mob as we have provided their photographs and
also they will also have to take some action against
the local intelligence man(whose involvement the
Police Commisioner has already refuted). I have given
all details at the back of the photographs to the
police of the people who attacked the car, the man who
threw the brick, the man who threw the rusted drum,
the goons who mobbed us. Their faces are circled in
the photographs that are being circulated with this
note.

When the attack took place on Panikkar's there were at
least three video camera's and a number of
photographers. The footage seems to have vanished.

Anhad is organising a meeting of activists and
academicians today at 4 at Ahmedabad.

Shabnam Hashmi

Ahmedabad

A perspective on the MSU events.

2007-07-14T11:49:00.000+05:30

Friends, I'm taking the liberty to jot down some thoughts on the MSU
and Husain attacks in the recent past. As a veteran target of BJP/RSS
assaults and their hate propaganda machine beginning with the SAHMAT
'Hum Sab Ayodhya' exhibit fracas in August 1993, we did learn a few
lessons. http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1816/18160760.htm

We cannot clearly understand the ground realities of these assaults
without understanding the politics of the larger cultural agenda of
the Sangh Parivar. Husain was the perfect target for them for the last
12 years. He was Muslim, he was the most famous artist in India, his
vast range of subject matter included Hindu icons. It was very easy
for the Sangh to project distorted interpretations of his modernist
vocabulary. But I think we have to understand that these hate
campaigns are aimed primarily at rousing the Hindutva constituency
themselves. They usually occur when things are not going well for the
sangh politically…loosing electoral support etc. If, as a fallout, the
propaganda is successful in spreading their poison in the larger civil
society, all the better.

The assault on the Baroda department clarifies the broadening agenda
of the Sangh assault on the secular and liberal cultural space. It has
shifted beyond the 'Muslims'…Husain, Shabana, Amir Khan. The Sangh is
not interested in Shivji Pannikar, Chandramohan, their essays or their
art. They couldn't care less what happens to them. I think it's very
clear they are out to destroy the department, and eventually fill it
with their own appointees. The very source of all these 'liberal
secular' artists and scholars will be sliced off at the root. Witness
what has happened to institutions at the centre or the states when the
Sangh has been in control: The IGNCA in Delhi, Bharat Bhavan in
Bhopal. It should also be clearly understood that the Sangh works
extremely systematically. The Jain invasion of the review session was
not spontaneous and isolated. Within days, photocopies of
Chandramohan's images were in discussion at the BJP parliamentary
board meeting in Delhi, Arun Jaitley was writing on them in the
newspapers, Sushma Swaraj was hosting an official BJP symposium on
'Obscene Art'. The idea that a 'discussion' should be initiated with
the BJP or Maneka Gandhi or Advani is very naïve. We should also
realise this is agenda not restricted to Gujarat alone.

The entire arts community is a target. We are all at risk as it is
open season now. While liberal voices are rightly raised in protest,
we should also realise these mean nothing to the Sangh parivar. they
could not care less. The only counter to them can be political, and
our voices are our only means of trying to persuade other political
forces to counter this hate machine politically. We can only hope they
will be heard.

Postscript: On a more positive note, I'd like to quote from Geeta
Kapur's remarks on Ramu Gandhi at his memorial at the IIC in Delhi a
few weeks ago. Mentioning that she had a conversation with Ramu on
Husain and his forced exile shortly before Ramu's death, Geeta quoted
Ramu:

Ramu was extremely pained by the fact of Husain's imposed exile, he
said " I cannot understand why they are attacking Husain. He is like a
child. How can they attack him? He is like a toymaker ..like our
traditional toymakers everywhere….he takes ideas, images, materials
and colours and he plays with them like a child …like a toymaker, and
like those toymakers, he will conjure up an image….and some of them
will magically be icons…"

I was very moved by this, and apologise to Geeta for quoting it, but I
felt it important to share!!!

Regards, Ram.

LEADER ARTICLE: Art Under Siege, 13 Jun, 2007, JANAKI NAIR

2007-06-13T18:45:00.001+05:30

http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/LEADER_ARTICLE_Art_Under_Siege/articleshow/2118446.cms

Message from Mr. Girish Karnad

2007-05-31T10:27:00.000+05:30

It's scandalous

The whole episode at the MS University, Baroda is scandalous at several levels:

1) At a basic level, every citizen of India--whether an artist or not--has the right to express himself.

2) In the present case, the self-expression did not take place in public but within the private domain, and so could not hurt any outsider.

3)The artist in this case was working as a part of an academic course and the person to decide whether he or she was acting in an acceptable manner was his or her supervisor or dean or head of department or the vice-chancellor. It is to guard this tradition that universities are made autonomous bodies. And outside organs, like the police, are forbidden from entering the campus without the express permission from the head.

4) The worst culprit in the present case is the Vice-Chancellor. It is his duty to ensure the safety of his students and staff and to safeguard the smooth funcioning of the university. The VC should have thrown the police out and demanded the release of the student. What he has done in fact is completely irresponsible. Certainly, in my entire life, in my dealings with many universities, I have not seen or heard of such shocking behaviour. The VC should be asked to resign and if he doesn't, sacked for derilection of duty.

This is not a minor episode. It foreshadows developments which could endanger the very basis of our civilization. If we let this go through without opposition, only deluge will follow.

Girish Karnad

14 May 2007

Condemn repression of artists in M.S.University,Vadodara by M.S.Thimmappa Former Vice Chancellor,Bangalore University.

2007-05-31T10:21:00.000+05:30

Closure of the exhibition of students paintings in the Fine Arts Department of M.S.University,Baroda by the so called activists and the University authorities is highly condemnable.University is the promoter and torchbearer of freedom of thought and expression.The Vice Chancellor of the university has committed dereliction of his primary
duty.India all through the ages has been nurturing divergence of ideas,faith and actions.The actions of those so called Hindu Activist is truly un-Indian.I express my solidarity and support to the group which is spearheading the protest, let us keep on protesting till the authorities rescind their heinous actions.

M.S.Thimmappa
Former Vice Chancellor,
Bangalore University.

Jadavpur University notes with deep concern and shock

2007-05-28T08:08:00.000+05:30

Date: May 19, 2007

To
Dr. Manoj Soni
Vice-Chancellor
The Maharaja Siyajirao University of Baroda
Fatehgunj, Vadodara: 390002

Dear Sir:

I am directed to quote below a resolution adopted by the Executive Council
(highest decision making body of the University) at the 'Zero Hour' of
meeting held on May 16, 2007 for your kind information:

'This meeting of the Executive Council of Jadavpur University notes with
deep concern and shock the recent events at the M.S. University of Baroda
which included the arrest of a student without any FIR or warrant,
disruption of regular academic activities by police and hooligans, the
suspension of the Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts by the Vice-Chancellor.

This meeting strongly condemns the intrusion of intolerance in one of the
most important institutes of the teaching of the arts in India in the name
of protecting some misguided notion of tradition.

We record our support of the courageous stand of the Dean of the Faculty of
Fine Arts, Professor Shivaji Pannikar.

We condemn this and other similar events, which have tried to vitiate the
traditions of plurality, enquiry and experimentation on academic campuses in
India. We urge all academics, students, artists and intellectuals to take an
active role in ensuring that certain fundamentalist individuals and groups
do not succeed in their efforts to stifle values enshrined in democratic,
artistic, academic and constitutional systems.'

Yours faithfully,

(R Bandyopadhyay)

Response to VC Soni’s Report on the ‘True’ Facts

2007-05-23T21:56:00.000+05:30

A Brief Report on the Recent Incidences At the MSU, Baroda
09May 2007 – 11 May 2007

The Maharaja Sayajirao Universiy of Baroda is amongst the top Universities in the country with very high global repute. The Faculty of Fine Arts is amongst its very best Faculties and is one of the top ranking institutions world-wide in the field of Fine Arts.

University Claim: On 9 May 2007, the citizens of Vadodara lodged their strong protest at the Faculty of Fine Arts, of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda. The protest was against an exhibition displaying a number of artworks deeply hurting the sentiments of Faith and decency of the society at large.

Response: The University claims that it took all its actions based on a strong protest that the ‘citizens of Vadodara’ had lodged. These so-called citizens have not been identified by the University authorities at any point. Where were their protests lodged? If with the University, why did the University authorities not communicate this to the authorities at the Faculty of Fine Arts? If not, the question is why were the University authorities not present when serious police action was being undertaken and examinations at the Faculty were being disrupted by these ‘citizens’. This was in spite of repeated phone calls made by the then i/c Dean. He was helplessly trying to apprise the University authorities of the situation when these so called ‘citizens’ were abusing staff and students of the Faculty, pushing them and manhandling the student.

University Claim: It is noteworthy that during his telephonic conversation with the Vice Chancellor over this incidence of protest, the then in-charge Dean Professor S. K. Panniker (who is currently suspended from the University Services) also termed these works of art as “objectionable”.

Response: This statement is misleading. Professor Shivaji K. Panikkar said that the issue is not whether the art work is objectionable or not; rather the issue is about a student of the University being arrested on the basis of his examination work without prior information given to the University or Faculty authorities. There are legitimate ways to lodge one’s objections and if it is overlooked by the concerned authorities (University/ Faculty) only then the question of lodging a complaint to the police or making a protest arises. Further, it is a shame that a person of a Vice Chancellor’s stature should try to misrepresent a part of the remark made over a telephonic conversation and try implicate or even insinuate that Professor Shivaji K Panikkar is also among those who found the art works “objectionable”.

University Claim: The protest was verbal and peaceful. The citizens had come to the Faculty of Fine Arts having read a news item in the Times of India dated 07 May 2007 and Gujarati daily Sandes dated 09 May 2007. These news items mentioned that the Works of Art created by the students of the Faculty as a part of their Annual Examination were open for public display on the 9th May 2007. Such public display has been a tradition. In fact, one of the teachers of the Faculty had sent messages through SMS inviting people to the display at the Faculty of Fine Arts. Thus, the claim in the media that the display was not open for public is untrue.

Response: Why are the University authorities saying that the display of examination work by students at the Faculty is a public exhibition? It is actually curious that the University authorities are now suddenly trying to designate the long standing examination procedures as a public exhibition. In its long history, the practical examination of the students in the Faculty has always culminated in a presentation of art works through display procedures. It is not an organized public exhibition. The Press information about the presentation of works was not issued by the Faculty/University. There are no invitations, no inauguration or any press note.
How does a private SMS which could be sent by people in their private capacity constitute evidence that the presentation of works at the Faculty of Fine Arts was a ‘public exhibition’?

University Claim: These citizens noticed that some of the works of Art displayed at the Faculty were highly deplorable.

One of the so-called work of Art was a huge Christian Cross where Lord Jesus Christ was shown with his penis out on the Cross, his palms and feet hanging from the two sides and the bottom of the Cross, respectively. Semen was shown as dropping out of his penis into a real toilet commode placed beneath the Cross. The toilet contained fishes.

Another very large sized painting showed a woman in nude posture. A baby was shown as attempting to come out of the vagina of the women. The picture depicted the women trying to attack the baby with a Trishul. The painting had the words “DURGA MATA” written at the bottom.

Similarly Lord Shiva and Lord Visnhu were also depicted in a highly derogatory manner in other so-called works of Art.

Response: The above descriptions of the works are repugnant and visually illiterate. It proves that a naïve verbal description of a work of art is inadequate to its understanding. It is appalling that the University authorities would indulge in such paraphrasing of works of art and would offer such crude and obscene readings of the images concerned. Regarding the image of a suffering Jesus on the Cross, the work is not figurative but symbolic. It can be interpreted to mean several things: one among them could be that the suffering of Christ on the cross has led his body to a condition of utter dissolution, turning Him into a fleshless state symbolized by water (fluids of the body). As His body drains into a receptacle (a modern commode) it takes its form as new life of elementary creatures (fish). In fact, the theme of water flowing out from the body of Christ after his crucifixion by those who disapproved of his ideas is mentioned in the Bible and is a revered part of the story that is read out in churches all over the world at the remembrance of his death that takes place each year on Good Friday. Also the themes of suffering, sacrifice and regeneration are key themes in most world philosophies and religions. Nothing could be more atrocious than the reading made by the University authorities of the water dripping from the cross as ‘semen’.

In the context of the second work described by the University authorities, it might be pertinent to note that images of naked birth-giving goddesses are entirely part of Indian religious iconography (Ref: Gopinatha Rao, Hindu Iconography; 3 vols). Here, in this painting, the courageous Goddess Durga is enacting the crime of foeticide (a practice routinely followed in patriarchal societies) in order to call attention to the horror and violence of the act that amounts to murder in the very womb. The overwhelming motif underwriting this piece of work is that of birth and death. Here the Devi is seen giving birth not to a baby child as the untrained eyes of the University authorities claim but she is actually giving birth to a fully grown man and is attempting to kill him in the process. The anger of the goddess is obviously directed against men as she safeguards the processes of fertility. We know that the killing of the girl child has become a rampant practice in our time to an extent that we are daily confronted with governmental campaigns to ‘save the girl child’. It is therefore quite possible to locate these artworks in the conditions of our present times. There are innumerable instances where, when confronted with the crisis in a society, artists have often recalled traditional iconographic representations to offer critiques of evil practices in their present society.

In the iconographical vocabulary of Indian art traditions, the Durga image is available in multiple forms, ranging from the benign to more wild forms. It is just that our eyes are used to seeing the pleasant forms of the goddess. The Vice Chancellor’s reading shows that there is a massive loss of memory of her wilder forms. In fact, in our religious literatures such as the Devi Mahatmya, Chandi Purana and Shiva Purana, the Goddess Durga is described in most ferocious terms, often without clothes, killing demons, drinking their blood and wearing the heads of the demons as garlands. There is a enormous archive of visual as well as textual material representing the sexual union of Shiva and Shakti. Apart from these widely known brahminical forms of Durga, there are numerous forms of the Goddess in various names and forms in folk and tribal traditions where the Goddess is worshiped in her most fierce form. The graphic work by the student draws its visual vocabulary from such a rich repertoire of visual and textual traditions and practices in India. It draws elements from a long tradition of Durga iconographies in order to express the rage of the mother goddess over all who in our time commit the heinous crime of female foeticide.

Here, we are not arguing that the readings that we offer are the only possible readings. We only want to point out that works of art by virtue of their special character allow multiple interpretations and is a matter for discussion. Why are the University authorities quick to endorse the reading of these art works as proposed by right wing ideologues? If these are the citizens on whose behalf the University takes a stand, what about all the citizens who would like to see alternative readings of these art works? The University should be a place allowing for contestation and debates over meaning and frameworks of seeing.

University claim: The media had already arrived by this time and were witnessing and recording / photographing the events that followed.

Response: The speed with which the police and the media arrived just after Mr. Niraj Jain’s intrusion into the display site shows that the whole incident was well orchestrated and preplanned to get maximum political mileage out of such an unfortunate act. In fact, the media was called by Niraj Jain and his associates.

University Claim: When the group of citizens led by Mr. Niraj Jain, as per his letter, protested and requested the student who had created these so-called works of Art to remove these objectionable works of Art from public display, the student refused to do so.

Response: There was no question of any request or legitimate protest; they came with the police and media, without Faculty or University permission and disrupted examination proceedings for cheap political mileage. They stormed into the examination hall shouting slogans, using abusive language and pushed and pulled the students around. They manhandled Mr. Chandramohan and his friend who was helping him in the display process. With the help of police, both of them were taken away. They were then detained in police custody. Later, due to strong student protest they released the other boy (Mr. Venkat Rao of Andhra Pradesh). These events have been extensively covered by both local and national media.
University Claim: Again the group of citizens requested Professor Panniker, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty to intervene and get those objectionable works of art removed from public display. Professor Panniker refused to do so.

Response: Mr. Niraj Jain and associates did not ‘request’ Professor Shivaji Panikkar, to take down the work; rather they threatened and abused him and other staff members with dire consequences. This can be corroborated by media footage which clearly shows Professor Shivaji Panikkar being pushed around by Niraj Jain. They did not give Professor Shivaji Panikkar a chance to inquire into the matter or consult with the Head of the Graphics Department or any other Faculty member. All this happened after the student was whisked away by the police at the behest of Mr. Niraj Jain.

University Claim: The protest was entirely peaceful and verbal. No damage was caused to the property of the University. No injury whatsoever was caused to any person.

Response: The protest by Niraj Jain was neither peaceful nor merely verbal. Even a cursory look at the media coverage and footage would prove the contrary. The question is how the University authorities can make the blatant claim that the so called protest was ‘entirely’ peaceful and verbal when an enquiry into the incident is pending and the report awaited. We are therefore compelled to conclude from such declarations that the University authorities have already exonerated Mr. Niraj Jain and his associates thus preempting the enquiry in their favor.

University Claim: On the request of the then in-charge Dean, the University officials arranged for police reinforcement with a request to provide necessary protection. The police promptly arrived at the venue.

Response: This is incorrect chronology. The police had already arrested student Chandramohan by then. During this arrest, the police neither took permission from authorities at the Faculty or at the main University. Professor Shivaji Pannikar had kept the University authorities informed of the developments telephonically, and the decision to call in the police was taken by the University authorities, as they claim. Even though the Dean had informed the Vice Chancellor and other authorities of the events taking place on campus, no help was forthcoming from their side. None of the higher authorities visited the Faculty. The University authorities (i/c Registrar MM Beedkar) came to the Faculty 5 hours after the incident had taken place, only to oversee the sealing process of the ‘objectionable’ art works. The University authorities had been apprised of this by the i/c Dean. During all this time, Mr. Niraj Jain was playing a terror game with the traumatized faculty staff and student fraternity without any hindrance. There was no attempt by the University authorities to protect staff and students from the offensive language and violent behavior of Mr. Niraj Jain and associates.

University Claim: After a very long and consistent persuasion, those objectionable works of art were removed and placed in a room, which was locked and sealed by the police on the basis of a complaint filed by Mr. Niraj Jain and in concurrence with the provision of relevant Law.

Response: The police ACP, T. R. Parmar ordered that the offending five works be taken down and sealed. This was communicated to the Vice Chancellor. Indeed, there were discussions between the police and the i/c Dean, but this concerned the modalities of sealing and the safety of the works. Even after the police arrived and ordered the removal of the ‘offensive’ pictures Niraj Jain and his associates roamed freely in the campus threatening staff and students alike threatening to tear down the works and vandalize them. The in-charge Registrar, Mr. Beedekar arrived only towards the end of the sealing process.

University Claim: None of the so-called works of art was damaged in any manner.

Response: The works have been dismantled from frames and roughly rolled.

University Claim: On the basis of a police complaint filed by Shri Niraj Jain in his individual capacity as a citizen, the student – Mr. Chandra Mohan, who had created those objectionable works of Art was arrested by police under relevant legal provisions. The University authorities deputed an official to provide all the possible help to the student.

Response: Police did not ask permission to enter the campus from either Faculty or University authorities. As PVC had informed Faculty members on an earlier occasion, even police cannot enter the University campus without permission. This violation of rules by the police as well as the consistent refusal of the University authorities to file FIR against Niraj Jain for unlawful entry and disruption of examinations suggests collusion. With regard to the student, NO help whatsoever has been provided to him by the University. University Claim: Subsequently, the University received a high number of representations and memoranda from several organizations, groups, individuals of high repute and common people from a cross section of society strongly urging the University officials to intervene and disallow the exhibition of such works of art that deeply hurt and offend the sentiments of Faith of various communities.

Response: If so, why didn’t the University authorities communicate this to the Faculty and ask for a report which is the prescribed procedure? It may also be noted that prior to the unlawful intrusion into the university premise and the disruption of the smooth functioning of the examination by Mr. Niraj Jain and his violent associates, Professor Shivaji Panikkar who was the i/c Dean had no inkling about complaints made about any part of the examination display. If the authorities were in possession of such information, earlier to the i/c Dean as it has been clearly stated in the report, not informing the Dean is a criminal negligence on the part of the University authorities.

University Claim: Thus, with a view to respect the sentiments of Faith of very large communities, as well as honoring the University’s social sensitivity and responsibility, the University officials including the Pro-Vice Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor requested Professor S. K. Panniker, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty several times to wind-up the exhibition.

Response: There was no need to give a verbal order to close down the examination display, [the ‘exhibition’ according to University authorities]. It was already closed down by the students themselves who were now busy writing complaints and pleas to the police and university authorities. Since Niraj Jain had arrived with the media who had covered the entire episode, news had spread across Baroda and the country. There were concerned calls from all over the country but not a word of concern by the University about the students who were being terrorized by the goons who the VC calls respectable citizens.

University Claim: Since the exhibition had already hurt the sentiments of Faith of very large societies, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty was also requested to issue a statement expressing at least regret and apology over such unintentional consequence of the exhibition. During such meetings of the Pro-Vice Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor with Professor Panniker, the then in-charge Dean, his colleagues were also present.

Response: The i/c Dean was called to the University office the next Day (10 May) where he was asked to tender a public apology. This was discussed in a staff student meeting at the Faculty. There was complete consensus that any public apology offered without active support to the Faculty and concrete actions against the intruders by the University authorities would be equivalent to abandoning the interests of students and giving tacit encouragement to vandalism inside the University campus. Therefore, it was decided that all legal help should be provided to Chandramohan and that an FIR be lodged against Mr. Niraj Jain. A memorandum to this effect was submitted to the University authorities.

Significantly the VC’s account of the ‘Truth’ of the incidents at Faculty of Fine Arts makes no mention of the memorandum signed by all the staff members of the Faculty. Moreover, the manner in which these decisions were taken shows that the i/c Dean, far from acting in an arbitrary manner, took all his actions in consultation with staff and students of the Faculty, and in their support.

It is very pertinent to note that the i/c Dean had in fact expressed, along with other staff and students regret for inadvertent and unintentional hurt caused to any member of public. This expression was carried in the memorandum given by the Faculty members to the University. Why has the VC consistently refused to look into the legitimate demands of the Faculty, even though the examinations were disrupted by the entry of Niraj Jain and associates?

University Claim: The then Faculty in-charge Dean, unfortunately, did not heed these requests. Regrettably, adding fuel to the fire, he made such offending public statements, which further hurt and flared up the common citizens’ feelings demanding strong action. In one such statements printed by the media, for instance, Professor Panniker, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, is quoted as saying that the Faculty of Fine Arts is like his personal bedroom and therefore, he is free to do whatever he desires there! Thus, the protest of the citizens of the city grew manifolds. Consequently, there was a huge public outcry from a cross section of society including the students of the University, demanding strong action in the matter.

Response: Professor Shivaji Panikkar’s statement to the media has been misquoted and further distorted by the VC. Professor Shivaji Panikkar told the media that the University is like a private space and that the general public cannot enter and comment on examination work; he used a metaphor to suggest that such an act by the ‘public’ is like barging into a private bedroom. It is very important to remember that the i/c Dean in consultation with his staff members had, in fact, issued a press statement expressing regret for inadvertent and unintentional hurt caused to any member of public. The press statement issued by the Faculty on 10th May 2007 says: “In the unfortunate circumstances of any published image, seen out of context, has caused hurt to anybody, it is regretted”

University Claim: As if this was not enough, in sheer defiance of the University officials requests and even executive orders, on 11th May 2007, once again, the then in-charge Dean, organized an exhibition in the evening displaying nude paintings in the name of an Indian culture!

Response: Professor Shivaji Panikkar did not organize any exhibition. The exhibition on Indian Tradition was organized by the students on their own initiative. It was a civilized and silent protest against the arrest of their fellow student, disruption of examination process by outside forces, their continuing presence in the faculty premises and the apathy of University authorities. By then, Chandramohan had been in jail for 3 days and students were feeling helpless. The exhibition was put together to educate the general public and the press about the long tradition of the nude present in Indian culture.

The exhibition was more of an illustration from works that students are supposed to study and be familiar with through their course work. These were images copied (Xeroxed) from scholarly books on Hindu sacred art along with the European traditions, drawn from academic curriculum of the Art History Department and used daily to teach the iconography and aesthetics of traditional Indian art. These cannot be termed as a display of “nude paintings”. Here, it is also important to note that far from saying he would arbitrarily refuse to follow authorities, the i/c Dean said that he need not ask for permission from the VC to support a peaceful illustrative exhibition mounted by the students drawing on artworks which are an integral part of their Art Historical curriculum that is approved by Board of Studies and the University Syndicate. This is deliberate distortion of facts by the University authorities.

University Claim: Since this unwarranted act of the then in-charge Dean could have sparked large-scale social disharmony and caused disruption, the University Authority deputed two Deputy Registrars and one Assistant Registrar for requesting the in-charge Dean Prof. Panniker, for not organizing the said exhibition. When these officials reached the Faculty and spoke to the then in-charge Dean, he refused point blank to stop the display and reacted that he was not required to take permission of anybody including University Authority for doing anything in the Faculty.

Upon this, the Authority deputed Registrar-in-charge with a written order directing the in-charge Dean to close the display. After acknowledging the letter of the Registrar-in-charge after a lot of dilly-dallying, Prof. Panniker adamantly continued on his stand of not closing the display and said he would keep the display open throughout the night and disobey the University authority’s lawful orders.

In spite of such disobedient behaviour of the then in-charge Dean, the Pro-Vice Chancellor of the University, Professor S. M. Joshi, along with the Senate and Syndicate members and leading citizens of the city went personally to the Faculty premises and repeatedly requested the in-charge Dean to close the display. Even then, the then in-charge Dean remained adamant and refused to heed the requests / orders of the Pro-Vice Chancellor.

Response: The report has given a long account of repeated orders and requests that were not ‘obeyed’. We would like to know since when did the verbal orders become official documents in this University. This, in a University where even the pettiest of official work is done through writing, through proper channel and procedures! That apart, we must consider the reasons for the i/c Dean’s action: The argument put forward by the Dean was that the students had sought the help of the University authorities a number of times. Since students felt that there was no help coming from the University authorities, the Dean was in no position to order the students to stop the exhibition. The students were already feeling morally oppressed and any order to stop the exhibition at that point would have led to a flashpoint in the Faculty. The Dean reiterated that he would stand by the students and staff. The authorities then sealed the exhibition and the Regional Documentation Center.

Why was the i/c Dean not asked for an explanation before he was unilaterally suspended? Why has the University acted in such unseemly haste to suspend him barely 2 hours after the sealing up of the Regional Documentation Centre and before Professor Shivaji Panikkar could even consider tendering his resignation as Dean? Why were there no attempts to talk to the students or staff? Why have the University authorities in a move that has no parallel in contemporary India sealed the documentation center at the Faculty? The fact that students and staff have stood behind Professor Shivaji Panikkar is an index of the loyalty and trust that he commands in the Faculty. This is evident in the mass CL taken by ALL the staff members and from the memorandum that they submitted in full support to the i/c Dean and the student protests over the last few days.

University Claim: The Faculty of Fine Arts is an integral part of the prestigious The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, known for its substantial contribution in placing Gujarat & Baroda on international cultural scene, and as such cannot be left solely on the whims & wishes of any one individual.

Response: It is very gracious of the report to acknowledge the importance of the Faculty of Fine Arts. It surely cannot be left solely on the whims and wishes of any one individual. But the question is can the running of such a prestigious Faculty be left to the hostile and punitive University authorities?
University Claim: In the event of the adamant refusal of the then in-charge Dean to heed the repeated requests from the University officials and his blatant refusal to obey lawful orders of the University officials and that too in such grave matter of hurting the sentiments of decency and societal harmony, the University had no other option but to suspend the in-charge Dean, Prof. S. K. Panniker from the University services for three months with immediate effect under the rules of the University.

Response: The University has paid no attention to the legitimate grievances of the Faculty of Fine Arts, nor has given the authorities in the Faculty a chance to explain the situation, nor have spoken to the students on this matter. On the other hand it has been overenthusiastic in supporting the allegations and interpretations of Niraj Jain and associates over that of Faculty members. University authorities have completely refused to file FIR against Niraj Jain for unlawful entry and disruption of examinations. The University has not taken any steps to provide legal help to Chandramohan the student. Rather it has suspended the i/c Dean Professor Shivaji Panikkar for taking steps to protect the Faculty of Fine Arts and to redress the grievances of its students. This suggests collusion by the University with Niraj Jain and associates in this shameful episode.
University Claim: The University authority has constituted a committee headed by Professor Syed Maswood, Dean Faculty of Law, with clear terms of reference for investigating entire matter in detail, identify all person/s responsible for this incidence, and recommend appropriate action under rules of the University.
Response: The Chancellor of the University has expressed concern at the nature of the Committee constituted by the Vice Chancellor to probe the issue. (TOI, May 19, 2007) Reports say that “The committee’s composition has come under severe criticism from several quarters as many believe that the members would go by the administrations view regarding the entire episode.” (TOI, May 19, 2007)
University Claim: The Chancellor of the University, Her Excellency Dr. Mrunalini Devi Puar, has publicly condemned such exhibition depicting divine personalities in derogatory manner.

Response: The invocation of the Chancellor’s remarks is only partial. In fact, from the beginning she has expressed concern over the intrusion of outside forces in the University affairs. Recently, she has also expressed her distress over the composition of the Committee instituted by the University to enquire into the incidence leading to the suspension of the i/c Dean Professor Shivaji K Panikkar.

In addition to a very large number of social organizations and common people, the leading citizens including Maharaja Ranjitsingh Gaekwad, Padmashri Sitanshu Mehta, Renowned Painter Shri Gulam Mohmmed Sheikh, Professor Dhruv Mistry, renowned Sculptor, Noted Poet Madhav Ramanuj and several distinguished personalities have issued public statements condemning the exhibition of objectionable works of Art that caused deep hurt to the sentiments of Faith of a very large society.

Response: The truth is that there has been widespread condemnation of the attack on the artist and the i/c Dean from all over the country. While many distinguished personalities have sought to understand the turn of events in the Faculty of Fine Arts, their remarks on the issue cannot be construed as a ‘condemnation’. For example, we know for a fact that Professor Gulammohammed Sheikh by no means expressed condemnation but rather supported the student and the i/c Dean as well as the courageous stand of the Faculty of Fine Arts. Even Padmashri Sitanshu Mehta has condemned the attack on art works and has expressed his concern over the nature of protest. In fact, the remarks made by these distinguished personalities call for debates around issues of art and sentiments of faith.

A University should be a place providing for critical thinking around issues concerning civil society and curricular freedom and the autonomy of educational institutions. In fact, the significant support, received by Professor Shivaji Panikkar has to be seen in the light of his defense of the University as a critical space where thought and ideas are nourished and nurtured. Debates on works of art in a free manner are essential to a critical democratic culture and the function that art performs within it. We would like to reiterate this point especially in the context of a long tradition of artistic and academic integrity at the Faculty. Instead, the University authorities have allowed the University space to be held hostage by a handful of local politicians who do not have any respect for civilized debate and concern for the reputation of the University.

Steps Taken to Restore Normalcy

University Claim: 01. The Security, particularly in the Faculty of Fine Arts, has been enhanced right from 09 May 2007. The Security personnel are ensuring that only those students and Members of the University fraternity are allowed entry inside the Faculty Campus who hold valid identity card or authentic identity document. Due care is also taken not to put genuine visitors to any inconvenience. The campus is totally peaceful.

Response: This claim of the University is absolutely misleading and is not based on any factual evidence. About 50 people came inside the Faculty premises on 13 May and tried to disrupt the silent protest-sit-in-dharna by the students and staff members of the Faculty with provocative slogans. Moreover the media was always allowed into the campus. It was allowed every day and has been reported by all the news media. The security measures in fact came into force only on the 14th of May when eminent citizens, alumni of the Faculty and artists from across the country converged to show their solidarity. The so called security measures were only part of attempts to put hurdles to a peaceful convergence of concerned citizens from all walks of life.

University Claim: 02. The Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, Professor Deepak Kannal is on leave and is currently in the U.S.A. on an academic assignment. He has been requested to pre-pone his return to India and is likely to resume his duties at the earliest possible.
Response: It is such an irony that Professor Deepak Kannal, Dean of the Faculty, who is on an academic assignment in the US has now been asked to cut short his schedule to clean up the mess that the University authorities have created at the Faculty of Fine Arts.

University Claim: 03. Since during the absence of the regular Dean, none of the senior members of the Faculty was willing to take the charge of the Faculty, Professor G. C. Maheshwari, Dean Fculty of Management Studies has been appointed as the Officer on Special Duty in-charge of the Faculty of Fine Arts till the Dean Professor Deepak Kannal resumes his duties.

Response: The very fact that no senior Faculty members were willing to take charge of the Faculty shows the unity among the staff members of the Faculty of Fine Arts and their faith in Professor Shivaji Panikkar and his rightful actions. The Faculty stood by Professor Shivaji Panikkar in all his actions, even at the time when i/c Registrar Mr. Beedkar came with a written order from the University Authorities to close down the exhibition of Indian Traditions, it was not just Professor Shivaji Panikkar but all the Staff Members signed and received the order to show that the decision about the exhibition was not just a whimsical act of any one individual but a careful decision taken by the staff collective considering the nature and the manner of the organized illustrative exhibition.

University Claim: 04. The results of the examinations of the Department of Museology, one of the six departments of the Faculty of Fine Arts, is declared. All the possible steps are being taken as to the conduct of the examination and the declaration of the results at the earliest possible.

Response: The Museology Department has a separate Academic Council and has less than seven students for their MA level Examination. All the other five Departments of Faculty of Fine Arts have a single Board of Studies and all the students in these Departments have Art History and Aesthetics as a compulsory paper for the Degree Program. The unfortunate action taken by the University Authorities to seal this Department has led to the further disruption of examination procedures. The entire examination papers of students are stuck inside the Department. Besides, Professor Shivaji K. Panikkar teaches and evaluates maximum number of papers for MA level students and as the Head of the Department he oversees the examination/evaluation of papers. His suspension from the post of i/c Dean and banning of his entry into the University premises has stalled the evaluation work. Some papers come under specialized category and only a person of Prof. Panikkar’s expertise and experience can evaluate them. Till today the University has hardly taken any measure to resolve the deadlock.

University Claim: 05. A committee of the following members is constituted on 12 May 2007 to investigate about:
(i) the incidence that occurred in the Faculty of Fine Arts on 09 May 2007 and subsequent developments related to it, and
(ii) the role, conduct and behaviour of Professor S. K. Panikkar, the then in-charge Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts with regard to the above referred incidence and frame charges against him.

01. Professor Syed Maswood, Dean, Faculty of Law, Convener
02. Dr. Prakash Shah, (M.D.), Syndicate Member, Member
03. Shri Mukundbhai Shah, Syndicate Member Member
04. Advocate Shri Rajendra Trivedi, Senate Member Member

The Convener is authorized to co-opt any other member(s) or invite artists for consultation.
The Committee is requested to submit its report at the earliest possible.
The Terms of Reference of the Committee will be as follows:
01 To ascertain the facts and evidences about the incidence that occurred in the Faculty of Fine Arts on 09 May 2007 and subsequent developments related to it.
02 To examine the role, conduct and behaviour of Professor S. K. Panikker, In-Charge Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts with regard to the above referred incidence.
03 To identify person(s) responsible for the incidence and subsequent developments related to it, and recommend appropriate action(s) with regard to those responsible.

Response: The nature of the Committee and the political affiliations of most of the Committee members are already known to the public through media reports. It exposes the intention of the University authorities and raises serious doubts about the inquiry procedures and the possible outcome. The Faculty of Fine Arts has a long and illustrious history and has alumni which is known world over. An inquiry into the incidence which involves art works does not have a permanent member who comes from a Fine Arts background. The Honorable Chancellor Mrunalinidevi Puar has also publicly expressed her dismay over the legitimacy and credibility of the Inquiry Committee (TOI, 19th May 2007, Front Page).

Administration of a university involves the application of rules and regulations that are crucial to the everyday functioning of the institution. In such a situation, it is of fundamental importance that the university practices its regulative function wisely and in a manner that keeps in view the customary practices of all its Faculties. The action of the administration riding roughshod over the Fine Arts Faculty's customary functioning is a clear instance of loss of administrative wisdom and failure of administrative competence. In such a situation, what needs to be judged is the whole set of actions and reactions, including the high-handedness of the Vice Chancellor and his administration. It is for this larger reason that the very act of the Vice Chancellor setting up an inquiry committee needs to be challenged.

All through his position paper, the Vice Chancellor has clearly endorsed all the sentiments and opinions of Mr Jain. He has already prejudged the matter even before hearing from the University’s own inquiry committee. The closed mindedness displayed by the Vice Chancellor and other University authorities forebodes the dismantling of academic and scientific values of careful and unbiased investigation. Their actions seem to have no respect for the democratic ideals of discussion and debate that have contributed to the rise of this university to its present status.

In the given situation, we demand that the inquiry be conducted on broader lines by an impartial national body. We also demand that the Vice Chancellor be disallowed from any further involvement in this issue.

ASSOCIATION OF ARTISTS, ACADEMICS AND CITIZENS FOR UNIVERSITY AUTONOMY (AAACUA)

Art, Tolerance, Religion, and Politics

2007-05-23T21:40:00.000+05:30

Professor Soni,

We have a tradition of challenging norms to make sure art and ideas don't degenerate into a source of mere comfort. Even the article you sent points out that we know to take such things in our stride. On the other hand, physical force as a means of settling differences has never been a part of who we are.

Any assertion that dismantling an exhibition and assaulting an artist protects our culture or tradition is disingenuous. You know that.

Threaded to this message are a couple of eloquent rejoinders that you might want to consider. No doubt you have come across many more. At the heart of all the rhetoric is the hope that you will find the courage to do the right thing.

Respectfully
Rahul Mehrotra

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibition brings beautiful photographs-and controversy
by John Shea, Compass manager

The colors in the large photograph are mostly reds and oranges, conveying an unexpected warmth to a familiar subject: Christ on the cross. The crucifix itself is bathed in golden highlights. The contours and edges of the crucifix are softened, and in fact the right extension of the crossbar tends to disappear into the deep orange background. On the surface of the print are clusters and streaks of tiny bubbles. Many observers would find the photograph gorgeous, even reverent. Its name: "Piss Christ."
"Andres Serrano: Works 1983-1993," which opened at the University's Institute of Contemporary Art last weekend, did not slip into Philadelphia unnoticed. Jeremy Chiappetta, a senior in the College and president of Penn's Newman Council of Roman Catholic students, was quoted in a Daily Pennsylvanian article expressing his outrage at the display of "Piss Christ." He also spoke at the November meeting of University Council, arguing that "this exhibition has detrimentally affected the climate" of the campus.
Last week, Chiappetta was one of the authors of a D.P. opinion piece about the photograph-and the University's exhibiting of it. Chiappetta and Elizabeth Broadwell, a Penn graduate student, argued that the University had taken prompt action when swastikas appeared in the Graduate Towers; yet Penn "has not shown similar respect for sensibilities outraged by an exhibit which was brought here with University approval."
Responding to Chiappetta at the University Council, Provost Stanley Chodorow said there was "a fundamental difference between a graffito and a work of art." He also maintained that Penn does provide for discussion of such controversial topics. Members of the graduate and undergraduate student governments offered to help stage discussions.
The Daily Pennsylvanian weighed in with an editorial that conceded the feelings that Serrano's work often provokes. On the other hand, the editors argued, "Freedom of expression is a basic, universal right, and the University, as a center for the study and comparison of conflicting ideas, should preserve that right at all costs." The editorial concluded by supporting both the I.C.A.'s right to mount the exhibition-and the right of people on campus to protest against it.
And that was exactly what happened last Friday evening: the Institute of Contemporary Art opened its doors for a private showing for its members and the press, while outside an estimated 50 people held a candlelight procession of protest, carrying a seven-foot cross of their own.
Provoking an ambivalent response
One of the questions viewers may ask themselves in looking at "Piss Christ" (1987) is whether their response to the photograph is determined largely by the title. It is hard to imagine the photograph provoking the same kind of outrage unless the circumstances behind it are known. As described in the exhibition catalogue, "This work presents a thirteen-inch-high, wood-and-plastic crucifix placed in a four-gallon, eighteen-by-twelve inch Plexiglas holding tank filled with the artist's own urine, which he had saved for several weeks."
Patrick Murphy, director of the I.C.A., defended the photograph last Friday, calling it "a convincing work of art" and "very moving." Serrano, he argued, has paradoxically elevated a cheap crucifix by using "a fluid that we consider base." He also pointed out that Serrano did not limit himself to Christian icons. There is also a photograph called "Piss Discus," which makes use of the famous ancient Greek statue of the discus-thrower. In these cases, according to Murphy, the artist has taken "souvenir statuary" and, through "an alchemical combination," created something compelling. (Serrano has also produced photographs using blood, milk, and other bodily fluids.)
Serrano's subject matter varies widely, ranging from what seem to be formal exercises of color and form to portraits. But the formal exercises often trigger more than aesthetic responses. "Blood Cross" (1985), for example, features a stark red cross against a background that recalls, according to the gallery card, "dreamlike theater sets." Sharp lines, formal shapes-but the cross seems to be leaking or dripping blood.
Similarly, with "Colt D.A. 45" (1992), it takes a moment to move from an appreciation of the formal, even abstract shape to realize that the hole one is staring into is in the extremely foreshortened barrel of a handgun.
The unconventional portraits feature members of the Ku Klux Klan and the Roman Catholic Church as well as street people - all somewhat apart from everyday society. In the case of the Klansmen, the photographs reveal traces of humanity in the imperfect stitching of the robes or the glimpse of an eye through an eyehole. Given the narrow palette of colors and the stark contrasts, the series moves almost into abstraction.
And, in a time when many people have grown numb from the deaths and atrocities reported on the news, Serrano's series of photographs in a morgue forcefully compel viewers to confront the reality of death. The photographs are in some way beautiful - even while they make the stomach flutter. The morgue series looks back in some ways to one of Serrano's early photographs, "Cabeza de Vaca" (1984). Here, a cow's head is mounted on a pedestal, looking, as the catalogue puts it, both "absurd and haunting."
The mission of the I.C.A.
Does an exhibition like Serrano's, which is likely to offend some viewers, have a place at a major research university? In words and actions, Chiappetta has argued that it does not. Murphy disagrees.
"We are a part of this academic institution, and I think original research is a very important part of that," he said Friday. "I see I.C.A. in some way chronicling the art of our time. To a great extent, we're like the avant garde of art history. We are documenting these artists in a very scholarly and intense way, both from the point of view of theory and the point of view of history. And so we're fulfilling the research mission of the University at the I.C.A."
Murphy added that this and other shows also fulfill "our other mission, which is the educational one. We make a number of programs around this exhibition-to give people access to our thinking about the exhibition, also to give people access to the artist, and to give them access to debate about this issue, which is our job." (Programs related to the Serrano show will be coming up in December and January, including an interview with the artist conducted by Murphy on December 7. For information, call 898-7108.)
"There is a lot of meat in this exhibition, and some people won't like it at all," Murphy continued. "But I think that in all cases, what it asks you to do is to meet with it and to sometimes argue against it and sometimes be moved with it."
Murphy noted that no federal or public funding was used to support "Andres Serrano: Works 1983-1993." As he put it, Murphy did not want the exhibition to become "a cause celebre," alluding to the controversy because the National Endowment for the Arts had funded work by people like the photographer Robert Mapplethorpe and the performance artist Karen Finley.
The I.C.A. exhibition and the catalogue were made possible by the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts; private donors; and the board, friends, and members of the Institute of Contemporary Art.
Closing at the I.C.A. on January 15, 1995, the exhibition will travel to the New Museum of Contemporary Art (New York); the Center for the Fine Arts (Miami); the Contemporary Art Museum (Houston); and the Museum of Contemporary Art (Chicago).

Refutation of false attribution in the M. S.University Report

2007-05-22T21:28:00.000+05:30

Refutation of false attribution in the M. S.University Report

My statement printed below, the only one issued by me on 11 May 2007 on the recent events in Baroda is self-explanatory about my unequivocal position on the issues concerned. I have not commented on the work of the student in question, verbally or in print and have not issued the statement or comments attributed to me in the Report circulated by the M.S.University (A Brief Report on the Recent Incidences At the MSU Baroda/ 09 May 2007 to 11 May 2007). It is the assault on the Fine Arts College premises by outsiders during the annual assessment that needs to be censured in no uncertain terms. I would like to reaffirm my commitment to the freedom of academic and creative expression.

In my opinion the Acting Dean Prof Shivaji Panikker supported by the staff of the Faculty has acted responsibly in this matter, upholding the best academic and administrative traditions of the Faculty of Fine Arts and the M. S. University and his suspension should be revoked without any preconditions.

Gulammohammed Sheikh

19 May 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statement issued on 11. 05. 2007

Dear friends

You must have known through media reports that Chandra Mohan, a student from the Department of Graphics at the Fine Arts College in Baroda has been arrested on 9th of May 2007 for making an allegedly controversial painting depicting nude figures with some religious motifs. The arrest followed the storming of the university premises by a group of outsiders. The work in question was part of a display in the college premises for assessment by a team of examiners for a Master’s degree in Fine Arts. Charged with sections 153 and 114 as well as sections 295 A and 295 B, he has been denied bail and is presently in Central Jail, Baroda.

In a civilized society any dispute on a controversial depiction or content of a work of art can be dealt with through dialogue and consultation with experts in the field rather than left to self-appointed moral police employing coercive means. In the present case, the outsiders taking law into their hands barged into the university campus without prior permission, did not consult or inform the Dean of the Faculty before disrupting the annual examinations in progress. The reports are that they returned again to abuse the Dean and threatened him with dire consequences.

Such an instance of assault on a student by outsiders in the university premises is unprecedented in the history of the Faculty of Fine Arts and must be condemned in no uncertain terms. The Fine Arts College known nationally and internationally for upholding the highest standards of creative and critical practice has also earned reputation for its firm commitment to the freedom of expression. The former authorities of the university like Smt. Hansa Mehta, the very first Vice Chancellor in the fifties up to Prof. Bhikhu Parekh in the eighties have stood by the Faculty and its ideals. The present assault seems to strike at the very ideals on which it was built by pioneering artist-academics and supported by enlightened university authorities. The present administration of the university has not initiated any action against the trespassers or applied for bail for the victimized student. The students and staff of the Fine Arts College have organized a dharna and the Acting Dean, Prof. Shivaji Panikker has planned to undertake a hunger strike in the College premises against the assault on the student and callous attitude of the university authorities

As an alumnus and former teacher of the Faculty of Fine Arts, I fear these developments may imperil the working of an institution which in many ways has formed our lives; and is indeed an integral part of what we are today. I hope all other alumni and teachers as well as concerned artists and intellectuals of the country will come forward to protect it in its moment of crisis when the values it stands for are threatened.

Gulammohammed Sheikh

your truth is not true - nikhileswar baruah

2007-05-21T09:30:00.000+05:30

from nikhileswar baruah hide details 2:52 am (6 hours ago)
to manojsoni@msubaroda.ac.in
date May 21, 2007 2:52 AM
subject your truth is not true.
signed-by yahoo.co.in

dear mr. manoj soni,
read your version of truth regarding the recent fine arts fiasco. i would like to request you not to misuse your position by issuing a statement which is partial, biased and misleading.
as an eye witness to the unfortunate events at the fine arts faculty on 9th may,2007,(and afterwards) i have a few things to say.

1. your statement says that "the citizens of vadodara lodged their strong protest" against some of the works by chandra mahon. do you think five/six people represent the citizens of vadodara? were they authorised or deputed by some kind of civic consensus?
it is alarming how loosely you use the term "citizens", making it sound as if the whole vadodara was on one side and the fine arts faculty was on the other side. wish you had some respect for facts. anybody (with an objective view of course) who witnessed the fine arts events from 9th may to 14th may will vouch for the fact that there are more people fighting for the fine arts faculty than people who were fighting against it. are "we" not citizens? or do we need some kind of approval/sanction to become citizens?

2. the news paper report saying that the display was open for public was a news paper report, not an announcement from the faculty authorities inviting general public( unlike fine arts fair, where fine arts faculty invites general public by means of invitation letters, announcements, poster campaign etc.). traditionally the fine arts annual display is open to people who are somehow related to fine arts ( friends and parents of students, artists, ex-students, art lovers etc.), who understand the nuances of art and know that a student's work (whatever the image) displayed within an academic institute can never be so influential as to disturb the fabric of a democratic society.
do you really expect us to believe that mr. niraj jain walked into the faculty as an innocent art lover without any agenda and spoted the so called "objectionable" works just by chance?
you also mentioned that some teachers sent out sms's inviting people for the annual display. i do not know if you use a mobile phone. let me tell you that when you send out group sms, it goes to people who are already on your phone book (meaning friends, family, acquaintances etc.), not to any tom, dick and harry who are out there with a pathetic agenda of civilising a society which is already civilised beyond their grasp.

3. you have twisted the chronology of events to protect people like niraj jain. neither police nor media "arrived" at the faculty. they came with niraj jain. why did he need media and police if he just wanted to express his complain to the concerned student and to the head of the institute?
the-in-charge dean did not ask for police protection as your statement states. he asked your office for protection from both the "concerned citizens" and the police. by the time the in-charge-dean came to know about the incident, the student was already arrested without informing the faculty or university authorities, after being manhandled by niraj jain and his group ( since you seem to base your arguments on media reports, please note that photograph of niraj jain manhandling chandra mohan was published in the news papers).
and when the students went to the police station later that evening to lodge a complain against niraj jain, the police did not even file an f.i.r. what kind of 'relevant legal provision" is this?

4. the in charge dean and faculty members were desperately trying to get in touch with your office. but no help came from the university authorities during the six/seven hours when mr. niraj jain was displaying his concern in the faculty premises. so when you say "university authorities deputed an official to provide all the possible(?!) help to the student", can you specify the date and the time? and if the "official" has any name or rank please? did the university appoint a lawyer (as it should have) so that the student can be released immediately, at least on bail?

5.you found it important to emphasise the point, by printing it in bold letters, that the protest (led by niraj jain) was verbal and peaceful(?!?!), nothing was damaged and nobody was injured. do you think they obliged us by not injuring anyone or by not damaging anything? or do you think they showed great restrain(applaud!) by not employing their usual methods?

6. subsequently, can you tell us how many of these organisations, groups, individuals of high repute ( who " strongly urged the university officials to intervenes and disallow the exhibition of such works") remain after you deduct those who wear the same political colour as mr. niraj jain? or do you have any reason to give more weightage to their side?

7. to ask the victim(the fine arts faculty) to express regret and apology was the height of absurdity beyond any logical understanding. do you think it is normal? do you really think so?

8. what do you mean by "displaying nude paintings in the name of indian culture"? they are part of indian culture. the works displayed(as a protest exhibition) were samples from traditional indian paintings and sculptures, not something created by the in-charge-dean or the students to hurt religious sentiments! we are all proud of our indian culture. you people are different though, ashamed of your own glorious culture and heritage.

9. your statement says "The Faculty of Fine Arts is an integral part of the prestigious The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, known for its substantial contribution in placing Gujarat & Baroda on international cultural scene, and as such cannot be left solely on the whims & wishes of any one individual."
your statement also says that other faculty members were present(in support) in the meeting when the in-charge-dean refused to apologise. try as you may, but the fact you can't deny is that majority of faculty members and students are protesting against the suspension of the in-charge-dean. so there is no question of "whims and wishes of one individual". the faculty of fine arts is an institute of international repute ( as you also mentioned it twice in your statement) because of these people, not because of your bunch of "concerned citizens", nor because of, sorry to point this out, the university authorities.

dr. shivji panikkar is not only a respected teacher, but also a reputed scholar with undisputed integrity and commitment. if some press report says that he compared the fine arts faculty to his bedroom, it is either a creative reporting, or a manipulation to fulfil some vested interest. i don't know which world do you belong to. but there are enough sane people in the society, thank you very much.

10. "The Security, particularly in the Faculty of Fine Arts, has been enhanced right from 09 May 2007. The Security personnel are ensuring that only those students and Members of the University fraternity are allowed entry inside the Faculty Campus who hold valid identity card or authentic identity document. Due care is also taken not to put genuine visitors to any inconvenience. The campus is totally peaceful." this is an utter lie. everybody and anybody could walk into the faculty till 13th may. and the faculty premises was crowded with all kinds of people. otherwise how could "organisations, groups, and individuals of high repute" who complained to you could see the "nude paintings in the name of indian culture" displayed inside the faculty, that too not in the front side but much inside? or did you give them permission to enter the faculty, so that they could complain to you? or was that the "due care" taken for "genuine visitors"? who was in charge of deciding who is a genuine visitor and who was not? the media was present inside the faculty almost round the clock. also one day when the fine arts students were on a sit-out protest, a group of a.b.v.p. members walked into the faculty holding, not i-cards, but placards (and shouting abusive slogans). did your security personal considered the tilak on their forehead as identity proof and let them in?
the issue of identity card and not allowing outsiders(including ex-students and artists, not as "genuine" as some others it seems!) came up only in the evening of 13th may, at 6pm to be precise. so obviously it had nothing to do with security, but insecurity on your part in the wake of the national level protest planed for the next day. the m.s.u. authorities and the police tried their best to stop the national level protest on 14th of may, though failed miserably. what are you scared of if you are right?
only truth in this part of the statement is that the campus is totally peaceful. what you forgot to mention is that it is peaceful not because of the police, or security, or the university authority, but because of the maturity of the fine arts students, teachers and their supporters.

11. mr. niraj jain saw to it that the "objectionable" works get as much publicity as possible, more than chandra mahon could even dream of, by reprinting it , or by describing the images to the media. when the police locked up the works, niraj jain led a group of media persons to take photographs of the images. the police officer in charge tried to stop them, but gave in eventually (niraj jain seems to have some super power). what was the point of removing the works from public view if they were going to be publicised? later that afternoon, when a christian lady was complaining that she could not see the work showing the cross, mr. jain promised her that he will show it to her. if it is simply a question of "hurting public sentiment", who did a greater damage, one who painted it, or one who took it to a wider audience/public ?

the summary of your story is that-
(a) niraj jain is an ideal citizen who is interested in nothing else but peace and harmony in society. and he was duly supported by the citizens of vadodara.
(b) chandra mohan is a criminal, deserved to be arrested (and jailed, if possible).
(c) dr. shivji panikkar is an adamant, arrogant, irresponsible person whose profession is to disobey orders from higher authorities.
(d) the artists, art lovers, academicians, activists and intellectuals from various fields, who stood up for the fine arts students and teachers, have no knowledge of art and culture, let alone social responsibilities. (may be we should take a course on indian art and culture from you and niraj jain?)

now, lets come to the point.
why are you taking so much of effort/trouble to justify some niraj jain, when, on the other hand, you were least bothered when one of your student was arrested, other students and teachers were insulted and terrorised by outsiders inside the university campus? why?
what could be your interest in an academic institution if you are not interested in academic procedure and safety of the students?
i am surprised that you head an institution of such repute as m.s.u. but i guess in today's time, one should not be surprised.
hope you have a reply.

yours shamefully,

nikhiledswar baruah

From Rabindra Bharati University

2007-05-20T10:26:00.000+05:30

Dear Friends,
What has occured in Baroda is indeed deplorable and I wholeheartedly support every effort being made to register protest against the incident.

However, while the Baroda incident has reached unprecedented proportions, incidents of curbing artistic freedom and expression in academic institutions elsewhere in India are not unknown. I, personally, as a teaching member of the Faculty of Visual Arts, Rabindra Bharati University, Kolkata have been witness to a similar occurence.
Roughly a couple of years ago, a young sculptor, Debanjan Ray was executing a project on a Lalit Kala grant at our Faculty under the then Dean, Prof. Partha Pratim Deb. As a part of his project, he was taking plaster moulds of live nude models, some of whom happened to be students of the faculty, in the faculty premises with the knowledge and permission of some members of the faculty. At the Dean's behest and Debanjan's request, my artist-colleague, Chhatrapati Dutta was requested to make a video recording of the project in-process.

In due course, a parent of one of Debanjan's student-model's made a complaint to the university authorities saying that his son had been unwittingly coerced into modeling nude for Debanjan's project and that a video was also made of the process, and that, according to him, the whole was immoral, obscene and impermissible. The parent, incidentally, also happens to be Principal of the Indian Art College, Kolkata that is affiliated to our university.

Consequently, the university instituted an enquiry commission, reports were published, Debanjan withdrew his project from the Faculty and completed it elsewhere, the Dean finished his term and refused a second extension, a second enquiry was instituted and concluded against Chhatrapati, and consequently he too has resigned. The results of the second enquiry commission have not been made known, nor has the university responded in any way to Chhatrapati's resignation, even though it has been months now. All there is is an eerie silence.

To our shame, I have to add here that, in fear of persecution, we as a faculty have failed to protest against the manner in which our colleagues, artists, and art practice have been victimised by the authorities. We have been completely silent despite being subjected to unacceptable moral policing, driven by both personal and political agenda. Questions have been raised about whether or not such practice is within the prescribed curriculum, whether or not the Dean is the final authority on granting permission in such matters, what is immoral/obscene in art practice, etc - all of it has gone unaddressed and remained enmeshed in bureaucratic red tape.

M.F. Husain, Chandramohan, Chhatrapati, and I'm sure countless others are victims of a frightening wave of bigotry and moral policing that is threatening to engulf art education and thereby, art practice in India - it cannot be allowed to continue unchecked. As an artist and, even more so as an academic, I raise my voice in protest against it.

Dr. Paula Sengupta
Sr. Lecturer
Dept. of Graphics (Printmaking)
Faculty of Visual Arts
Rabindra Bharati University
Kolkata

The truth according to the office of the Chancellor with vices

2007-05-19T11:01:00.000+05:30

Sir,

I am utterly dismayed by the manner in which you have handled the recent high handed assault by BJP Members, led by Mr. Niraj Jain, on the student(s)and the subsequent suspension of the most eminent Dean in Charge of the Faculty of Arts at the MS University in Baroda. This kind of misuse of Political Power brings shame on us all.

Yours, deeply pained - Dr. J.A. Kohiyar

From: manojsoni@msubaroda.ac.in
To: "Jehangir Kohiyar" jeraifit@hotmail.com
Subject: Truth
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 09:27:36 +0530 (IST)

Dear Dr. Kohiyar

The attachment to this mail caries a Statement of Facts about the recent incidences at the Faculty of Fine Arts, MSU. If you desire to know the truth, the atachment may be accessed. I hope that you msut have cared to or have had an opportunity to look at the "Works of Art" at the centre of the controversy, as originally displyed.

Yours equally pained
Manoj

Statement of facts about the Recent Incidences At the MSU, Baroda
09May 2007 – 11 May 2007

The Maharaja Sayajirao Universiy of Baroda is amongst the top Universities in the country with very high global repute. The Faculty of Fine Arts is amongst its very best Faculties and is one of the top ranking institutions world-wide in the field of Fine Arts.

On 9 May 2007, the citizens of Vadodara lodged their strong protest at the Faculty of Fine Arts, of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda. The protest was against an exhibition displaying a number of artworks deeply hurting the sentiments of Faith and decency of the society at large.

It is noteworthy that during his telephonic conversation with the Vice-Chancellor over this incidence of protest, the then in-charge Dean Professor S. K. Panniker (who is currently suspended from the University Services) also termed these works of art as “objectionable”.

The protest was verbal and peaceful. The citizens had come to the Faculty of Fine Arts having read a news item in the Times of India dated 07 May 2007 and Gujarati daily Sandesh dated 09 May 2007. These news items mentioned that the Works of Art created by the students of the Faculty as a part of their Annual Examination were open for public display on the 9th May 2007. Such public display has been a tradition. In fact, one of the teachers of the Faculty had sent messages through SMS inviting people to the display at the Faculty of Fine Arts. Thus, the claim in the media that the display was not open for public is untrue.

These citizens noticed that some of the works of Art displayed at the Faculty were highly deplorable.

One of the so-called work of Art was a huge Christian Cross where Lord Jesus Christ was shown with his penis out on the Cross, his palms and feet hanging from the two sides and the bottom of the Cross, respectively. Semen was shown as dropping out of his penis into a real toilet commode placed beneath the Cross. The toilet contained fishes.

Another very large sized painting showed a woman in nude posture. A baby was shown as attempting to come out of the vagina of the women. The picture depicted the women trying to attack the baby with a Trishul. The painting had the words “DURGA MATA” written at the bottom.

Similarly Lord Shiva and Lord Visnhu were also depicted in a highly derogatory manner in other so-called works of Art.

The media had already arrived by this time and were witnessing and recording / photographing the events that followed.

When the group of citizens led by Mr. Niraj Jain, as per his letter, protested and requested the student who had created these so-called works of Art to remove these objectionable works of Art from public display, the student refused to do so. Again the group of citizens requested Professor Panniker, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty to intervene and get those objectionable works of art removed from public display. Professor Panniker refused to do so.

The protest was entirely peaceful and verbal. No damage was caused to the property of the University. No injury whatsoever was caused to any person.

On the request of the then in-charge Dean, the University officials arranged for police reinforcement with a request to provide necessary protection. The police promptly arrived at the venue. After a very long and consistent persuasion, those objectionable works of art were removed and placed in a room, which was locked and sealed by the police on the basis of a complaint filed by Mr. Niraj Jain and in concurrence with the provision of relevant Law. None of the so-called works of art was damaged in any manner.

On the basis of a police complaint filed by Shri Niraj Jain in his individual capacity as a citizen, the student – Mr. Chandra Mohan, who had created those objectionable works of Art was arrested by police under relevant legal provisions. The University authorities deputed an official to provide all the possible help to the student.

Subsequently, the University received a high number of representations and memoranda from several organizations, groups, individuals of high repute and common people from a cross section of society strongly urging the University officials to intervene and disallow the exhibition of such works of art that deeply hurt and offend the sentiments of Faith of various communities.

Thus, with a view to respect the sentiments of Faith of very large communities, as well as honoring the University’s social sensitivity and responsibility, the University officials including the Pro-Vice Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor requested Professor S. K. Panniker, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty several times to wind-up the exhibition.

Since the exhibition had already hurt the sentiments of Faith of very large societies, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty was also requested to issue a statement expressing at least regret and apology over such unintentional consequence of the exhibition. During such meetings of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor with Professor Panniker, the then in-charge Dean, his colleagues were also present.

The then Faculty in-charge Dean, unfortunately, did not heed these requests. Regrettably, adding fuel to the fire, he made such offending public statements, which further hurt and flared up the common citizens’ feelings demanding strong action. In one such statements printed by the media, for instance, Professor Panniker, the then in-charge Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, is quoted as saying that the Faculty of Fine Arts is like his personal bedroom and therefore, he is free to do whatever he desires there! Thus, the protest of the citizens of the city grew manifolds. Consequently, there was a huge public outcry from a cross section of society including the students of the University, demanding strong action in the matter.

As if this was not enough, in sheer defiance of the University officials requests and even executive orders, on 11th May 2007, once again, the then in-charge Dean, organized an exhibition in the evening displaying nude paintings in the name of and Indian culture!

Since this unwarranted act of the then in-charge Dean could have sparked large-scale social disharmony and caused disruption, the University Authority deputed two Deputy Registrars and one Assistant Registrar for requesting the in-charge Dean Prof. Panniker, for not organizing the said exhibition. When these officials reached the Faculty and spoke to the then in-charge Dean, he refused point blank to stop the display and reacted that he was not required to take permission of anybody including University Authority for doing anything in the Faculty.

Upon this, the Authority deputed Registrar-in-charge with a written order directing the in-charge Dean to close the display. After acknowledging the letter of the Registrar-in-charge after a lot of dilly-dallying, Prof. Panniker adamantly continued on his stand of not closing the display and said he would keep the display open throughout the night and disobey the University authority’s lawful orders.

In spite of such disobedient behaviour of the then in-charge Dean, the Pro-Vice-Chancellor of the University, Professor S. M. Joshi, along with the Senate and Syndicate members and leading citizens of the city went personally to the Faculty premises and repeatedly requested the in-charge Dean to close the display. Even then, the then in-charge Dean remained adamant and refused to heed the requests / orders of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor.

The Faculty of Fine Arts is an integral part of the prestigious The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, known for its substantial contribution in placing Gujarat & Baroda on international cultural scene, and as such cannot be left solely on the whims & wishes of any one individual.

In the event of the adamant refusal of the then in-charge Dean to heed the repeated requests from the University officials and his blatant refusal to obey lawful orders of the University officials and that too in such grave matter of hurting the sentiments of decency and societal harmony, the University had no other option but to suspend the in-charge Dean, Prof. S. K. Panniker from the University services for three months with immediate effect under the rules of the University.

The university authority has constituted a committee headed by Professor Syed Maswood, Dean Faculty of Law, with clear terms of reference for investigating entire matter in detail, identify all person/s responsible for this incidence, and recommend appropriate action under rules of the University.

The Chancellor of the University, Her Excellency Dr. Mrunalini Devi Puar, has publicly condemned such exhibition depicting divine personalities in derogatory manner.

In addition to a very large number of social organizations and common people, the leading citizens including Maharaja Ranjitsingh Gaekwad, Padmashri Sitanshu Mehta, Renowned Painter Shri Gulam Mohmmed Sheikh, Professor Dhruv Mistry, renowned Sculptor, Noted Poet Madhav Ramanuj and several distinguished personalities have issued public statements condemning the exhibition of objectionable works of Art that caused deep hurt to the sentiments of Faith of a very large society.

Steps Taken to Restore Normalcy

01. The Security, particularly in the Faculty of Fine Arts, has been enhanced right from 09 May 2007. The Security personnel are ensuring that only those students and Members of the University fraternity are allowed entry inside the Faculty Campus who hold valid identity card or authentic identity document. Due care is also taken not to put genuine visitors to any inconvenience. The campus is totally peaceful.

02. The Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, Professor Deepak Kannal is on leave and is currently in the U.S.A. on an academic assignment. He has been requested to pre-pone his return to India and is likely to resume his duties at the earliest possible.

03. Since during the absence of the regular Dean, none of the senior members of the Faculty was willing to take the charge of the Faculty, Professor G. C. Maheshwari, Dean Fculty of Management Studies has been appointed as the Officer on Special Duty in-charge of the Faculty of Fine Arts till the Dean Professor Deepak Kannal resumes his duties.

04. The results of the examinations of the Department of Museology, one of the six departments of the Faculty of Fine Arts, is declared. All the possible steps are being taken as to the conduct of the examination and the declaration of the results at the earliest possible.
05. A committee of the following members is constituted on 12 May 2007 to investigate about:
(i) the incidence that occurred in the Faculty of Fine Arts on 09 May 2007 and subsequent developments related to it, and
(ii) the role, conduct and behaviour of Professor S. K. Panikkar, the then in-charge Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts with regard to the above referred incidence and frame charges against him.

01. Professor Syed Maswood, Dean, Faculty of Law, Convener
02. Dr. Prakash Shah, (M.D.), Syndicate Member, Member
03. Shri Mukundbhai Shah, Syndicate Member Member
04. Advocate Shri Rajendra Trivedi, Senate Member Member

The Convener is authorized to co-opt any other member(s) or invite artists for consultation.
The Committee is requested to submit its report at the earliest possible.
The Terms of Reference of the Committee will be as follows:
01 To ascertain the facts and evidences about the incidence that occurred in the Faculty of Fine Arts on 09 May 2007 and subsequent developments related to it.
02 To examine the role, conduct and behaviour of Professor S. K. Panikker, In-Charge Dean, Faculty of Fine Arts with regard to the above referred incidence.
03 To identify person(s) responsible for the incidence and subsequent developments related to it, and recommend appropriate action(s) with regard to those responsible.

RULES REGARDING DISCIPLINE AND CONDUCT OF UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES

‘Chapter XLIX’ (Page No. 341 of the Handbook of the MSU) states as under:

No.2 During the hours fixed for his duties, he shall devote himself diligently to his work, AND GIVE FULL CO-OPERATION IN ALL UNIVERSITY WORK.

No. 5 HE SHALL RESPECT ALL LAWFUL ORDERS FROM HIS SUPERIOR OFFICERS AND CARRY THEM OUT FAITHFULLY.

No. 6 HE SHALL SEE THAT THE UNIVERSITY PROPERTY, ARTICLES, APPARATUS, MONEY ETC. IN HIS CHARGE ARE USED WITH REASONABLE CARE, and proper precautions are taken against any possible damage to them or loss to the University.

No. 9 HE SHALL STUDY THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, STATUTES, ORDINANCES, RULES, REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURE SO FAR AS THEY CONCERN THE PROPER DISCHARGE OF DUTIES ATTACHED TO HIS POST, AND SEE THAT HE CONFORMS TO THEM IN HIS DAILY DUTIES.

No. 13 Unless generally or specially empowered in this behalf, he shall not communicate directly to outside persons or associations or to the press any documents or information which has come into his possession in the course of his duties or has been prepared or collected by him in the course of these duties, whether from official sources or otherwise.

No.16 THE UNIVERSITY TEACHERS SHOULD REFRAIN FROM ANY ACTIVITY WHICH TENDS TO CREATE COMMUNAL DISHARMONY.

Hindu nationalist backlash against Husain and Chandramohan - nudity in Indian art/

2007-05-19T09:59:00.000+05:30

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ASIA

TASTE

Nationalism and Nudes

By SALIL TRIPATHI

May 18, 2007

Near the end of James Joyce's "A Portrait of the Artist as a Young
Man," Stephen Dedalus tells the reader, "I will not serve that in
which I no longer believe, whether it call itself my home, my
fatherland, or my church: And I will try to express myself in some
mode of life or art as freely as I can and as wholly as I can, using
for my defence the only arms I allow myself to use -- silence, exile
and cunning."

For the 91-year-old Indian painter, Maqbool Fida Husain, perhaps
India's most renowned artist, these words must carry a special
meaning. In his long career he has painted scores of Hindu deities,
often without clothes. For years this offended no one. But as Hindu
nationalism grew more militant he became a target. For much of the
past decade, Hindu nationalists have destroyed his paintings,
ransacked art galleries where his work is displayed, and filed over a
thousand cases against him for offending their sensibilities.

Last week, a court ordered his property seized for failing to respond
to a summons in a case involving a nude portrayal of a woman
resembling "Mother India." His lawyers pointed out that he had not
received the summons, and a higher court restrained the lower court's
order.

Still, Mr. Husain has been effectively silenced -- few galleries in
India show his work. He lives in exile -- involuntarily, in London and
Dubai -- for fear of being attacked physically by mobs whose idea of
art criticism is to make a bonfire of his canvases.

Emboldened by their success in hounding Mr. Husain, Hindu nationalists
are now looking elsewhere for "offensive" art. On May 9, one such
group unlawfully entered the Maharaja Sayajirao University campus and
assaulted an award-winning art student named Chandramohan
Srilamantula. Like Mr. Husain, his work includes nude Hindu deities as
well as a painting depicting the crucifix. So for good measure the
Hindu activists brought along a few Christians as well. They roughed
him up, had him arrested by the local police, and the following day a
judge sent him to the city's central jail.

While his dean vigorously supported Mr. Chandramohan, the university's
administrators, in an act of stunning cowardice, refused to post bail
for the student or offer legal help, and instead asked him to
apologize. Not only was this a blow to free expression and academic
freedom; on the face of it, the arrest was illegal. Leading artists
and writers from around India protested the arrest. Mr. Chandramohan
was released on bail on Monday, on condition that he notify the police
if he planned to leave the state or the country while the case was
pending.

Hindu nationalists' campaign against Mr. Husain has been particularly
sharp because he is, as his name suggests, a Muslim, and relations
between the two communities have always been sensitive. Yes, Mr.
Husain has painted many Hindu deities -- the monkey-god Hanuman; the
elephant-headed god Ganesha; Rama's consort, Sita; the goddess of
learning, Saraswati -- in the nude. Yet in doing so, Mr. Husain is
hardly being a pioneer: For millennia, Hindu divinities have appeared
without clothes in art.

The whole point of such art is to look beyond the body. Indeed,
another Hindu god, Shiva, who often wore little more than an animal's
skin as a loincloth, calls himself nirakara, or formless. So when Mr.
Husain depicts a Hindu deity in the nude, he is following an Indian
tradition, and not insulting or defying it. Indeed, his art and
freedom of expression was once a shining example of India's thriving
secular democracy.

Sadly, however, since the late 1980s, Hindu nationalists have
convinced many Hindus that they are the victims of reverse
discrimination. Muslims are the recipients, they argue, of undeserving
state-led appeasement.

To be sure, the state has been inept. In 1986, the Indian parliament
caved in to Muslim protests and overturned a Supreme Court verdict
which granted Muslim women the right to sue their husbands for
alimony. Then in 1992, the state failed to protect a disputed
16th-century mosque in Ayodhya, which Hindu activists destroyed,
claiming that one of their gods, Rama, was born at that precise spot.
Hundreds died in the riots that followed.

In such a climate, it might seem naïve or foolhardy for Messrs. Husain
or Chandramohan to paint Hindu deities in the nude. But artists don't
follow societal whims and fashions; they respond to inspirations and
emotions. They follow their calling and challenge conventional wisdom,
even if it shocks the viewers.

Vulgarity lies in the eye of the beholder. But in Indian art, nudity
has long connoted openness. Mr. Husain's paintings force viewers to
rethink their relationship with Hindu myths -- they aren't meant to
titillate. His nudes delineate the body in sharp lines, elevating it
to an abstract realm, suggesting the formlessness of divinity.

Artists and scholars understand those ideas, which are too complex for
those who would burn galleries. Yet they want equal treatment and
equal time. So if Muslims can get Salman Rushdie's "The Satanic
Verses" or the Danish cartoons banned, they want Mr. Husain's -- and
now Mr. Chandramohan's -- freedom restricted.

At last, it seems, Hindus have secured the parity they believe they've
been denied. They have their own Taliban.

Mr. Tripathi is a writer based in London.

Online Petition to the Governor of Gujrat

2007-05-18T09:30:00.000+05:30

The petition is available at : http://www.petitiononline.com/MSUAUTO/

To
The Governor of Gujarat
Raj Bhavan, Sector-20,
Gandhinagar - 382020
Gujarat, India.

Sir,

We write to you in your capacity as the Visitor to the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda. We strongly condemn the recent actions of the group of people with affiliations to Hindu supremacist groups, who barged into the Fine Arts campus of M.S. University, disrupted the examination and abused and threatened students and faculty members. Such attempts to stifle by force the rights to free speech and expression of individuals, and to impose on society in general the narrow perceptions of certain sections regarding what is permissible and what is not, constitute a serious threat to democratic institutions and practices.

The response of the University authorities to these events has, if anything, been even more disturbing than the actions of these self-appointed guardians of �morality�. Far from acting to protect the academic interests and the notions of autonomy and academic freedom which are so central to the very concept of a university, the University authorities have actually acted in concert with the hooligans who are threatening the functioning of the university. Where they should have initiated prompt legal action against the intruders and against the police who illegally entered the campus and arrested a student, and where they were duty-bound to make every effort to secure the immediate release of the student (who was released on bail after 5 days in custody), the University authorities chose to look the other way. Most shocking of all is the fact that the Vice-Chancellor subsequently advised the victims of the attack - students and faculty of the Fine Arts Faculty � to apologise for the events. Not content with this, the University administration further took the unprecedented step of suspending Dr. Shivaji Panikkar, the Dean of the Fine Arts Faculty, and barring his entry to the Fine Arts campus.

We wish to express our complete outrage at the actions of the Vice Chancellor and administration of the University. We would like to suggest that if the highest officials of the M.S. University administration are so out of sympathy with basic ideas, accepted the world over, of how a university should function, then they should relinquish any administrative functions in an academic institution.

As you are aware, the Fine Arts Faculty of M.S. University has enjoyed (and continues to enjoy) the reputation of being India�s leading Fine Arts school, which has had well-known artists on its faculty and has been the nucleus for a vibrant and internationally renowned artists' community. In order to remedy the situation and reassert the stature of the Fine Arts Faculty and the University as respectable centres of academic excellence that abide by generally accepted norms of functioning of a university, we demand that the following steps be urgently implemented:

1. Dismissal of the untenable and phony police case against the student, Mr. Chandra Mohan

2. Immediate revoking of the suspension order against Dr. Shivaji Panikkar, Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts

3. Initiation of legal action against the intruders on the University campus, including the police who improperly arrested Mr. Chandra Mohan in complete violation of D. K. Basu guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court of India

4. Apology by the Vice-Chancellor of M.S. University to the academic community of the University

We sincerely hope that even at this late stage you will take action to undo some of the damage that is being inflicted on a prestigious institution.

Sincerely,

Sincerely,

Undersigned

Online Petition to SAHMAT

2007-05-17T13:04:00.000+05:30

Dear All,
Please consider signing the following petition against the recent outrage at MS University Baroda.

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/ms150507/petition.html

From Hyderabad

2007-05-16T17:58:00.000+05:30

Statement

Condemning the arrest of Chandramohan, art student, on 9th May 2007 and the suspension of Shivaji Panikkar, Dean of Faculty of Fine Arts on 10th May 2007 at Maharaja Sayajirao University, Baroda.

Issued by Anveshi Research Centre for Women’s Studies
And Vidyasagar’s Art Centre, Hyderabad

Released at a protest meeting supported by Shrishti Art Gallery, Hyderabad
On Sunday, 13th May 2007

Background:

On 9th of May, the final year display assessment of artwork by students of the fine arts faculty of MS University Baroda was interrupted. Niraj Jain, a VHP activist, stormed into the faculty building accompanied by the media and followed by the police. One young student Chandramohan was manhandled because his pictures allegedly offended religious sensibilities, and was whisked away by the police without an FIR or a warrant. No permission was taken from the in-charge Dean, Dr. Shivaji Panikkar or the Vice-Chancellor of the University. Even though the Dean informed the Vice-Chancellor and other authorities of the events taking place on campus, no help or sympathy was forthcoming.
As Niraj Jain and his associates roamed freely across the campus threatening staff and students alike, the police ACP, T. R. Parmar ordered that the offending five works be taken down and sealed
Chandramohan was produced at court at about 10:30 a.m. on the 10th May, along with a representative of the student body posting bail, and a PUCL lawyer. A large contingent of VHP-related or associated activists were also present, who jostled and intimidated him. They effectively stalled the proceedings. The judge asked him to be removed to the Baroda Central Jail, where he has been lodged ever since. His bail plea will be heard on Monday, 14th May.
Students and staff submitted a memorandum to the Vice-Chancellor asking, a) that the University must file an FIR against Niraj Jain for disrupting the exams; b) that all legal help must be extended to the student in custody. Instead of responding to these demands the Vice-Chancellor wanted an unconditional apology from the staff and the students of the Faculty of Fine Arts to the public, for offending their sentiments.
It was decided by the students that an exhibition dealing with the long history of Erotica in both Indian and Western art would be put up in order to educate the press and the public. Many came and visited the exhibition. At around 4:00 p.m the Deputy Registrar issued a verbal request that the exhibition be closed down, which the Dean refused to accede to, as it was a peaceful protest by the students drawing material from the academic curriculum. A written order followed and was received by the Dean and Faculty members, but the exhibition continued. The Pro Vice Chancellor then arrived at the venue, accompanied by some members of the Syndicate of the University. They requested Dr Panikkar to close down the exhibition and then ordered him to do so. When the Dean would not comply they had the exhibition locked.
The argument put forward by the Dean was that the students had invoked the help of the University authorities a number of times. So far as no help had been extended to them. How could he, as the Dean, be sure that the authorities’ actions were for the good of the University? The Dean reiterated that he would stand by the students and staff. The authorities sealed the exhibition and the Regional Documentation Center.
A suspension order was pasted on the Dean’s Residence door at 10:00 p.m. No reason has been given for his suspension. As per the local media, the Dean of Management Faculty, professor Maheshwari, has been given charge of the Fine Arts Faculty. Teachers have gone on mass casual leave in protest of the University’s decision.
This sequence of events shows clearly the highhanded conduct of the authorities, the police and the state machinery. Protesting against this is important in the context of the recent attacks on film, art and literary works. Our stand is not that art should be removed from the sphere of politics. We only contend that terror should not be deployed in lieu of politics. For several reasons:

What are the issues at stake here?
1. The space of the university: The University is a space that is designed to help students grow and mature in their thought and conduct through debate, criticism and discussion. Thus, the institution is expected to provide guardianship and custodial responsibility to the student in most positive ways imaginable. The failure of the university administration to provide this environment of critical support is a serious collapse of an educational institution’s primary objective. More, the manner in which the student has been abandoned by the administration demonstrates a deplorable failure to perform its duty.
2. The university’s responsibility: The current administration of MS University, Baroda has failed to maintain the customary high standards of the institution, which has had a history of being a prime mover in the development of modern Indian art since the freedom movement. The Vice Chancellor of the university represents the ideals of the institution. Previous Vice Chancellors such as Hansa Mehta and Bhikhu Parekh have been legendary for their vision, liberal thinking and progressive stances towards art. The current regime represents an abysmal decline from these past standards. The in-charge Dean of the Fine Arts Faculty, Dr. Shivaji Panikkar represents a diminishing trend of administrative integrity and commitment to education in India.
3. Legal questions: The entry of the VHP operatives, the arbitrariness of the police actions and the conduct of the administration raise serious legal problems. What gives a group of outsiders the right to enter the university premises without the permission of the administration? How can a party functionary act as the moral police deciding to terminate an exhibition? Under what authority does the police enter an educational premises unbidden, and how can they whisk a student away without an arrest warrant? How was the display of artwork that had been exhibited for assessment equated to a public exhibition?
4. Excesses of state machinery: The behavior of the state machinery in this case is puzzling in its excess. Why is a boy, who has probably barely crossed 20 years of age, and is in any case a student--by definition not yet a fully developed intellect—first manhandled, then unceremoniously whisked away by the police and then detained in state custody for not less than five days? Is there some measure or wisdom in the state’s eagerness to punish this child? The dismaying conclusion here is that the student is nothing more than an excuse for other agendas.
5. The student and his potential: It is important to look at the student in his special nature. Chandramohan, a fine arts student, is the son of a carpenter. It is truly remarkable that the Baroda fine arts faculty is able to teach and nurture students who come from such underprivileged backgrounds in an elite academic and cultural tradition of fine art. Chandramohan represents the best potential for democratic functioning of our institutions of education – he holds out the hope for a more egalitarian future of our caste-ridden society. The state machinery and the university administration have in one fell swoop forced him to submit to an incarceration that will mark his memory for life. To what purpose is such terror inflicted on such tender life?
6. Terror or politics? It is not our contention that art should be insulated from political pressures. Art has always questioned and been confronted by political pressures over several centuries. We welcome political argument, debate, criticism and yes, even uncompromising denunciation. Our protest is that politics cannot be replaced by terror. Terror annuls the difficult gains democratic politics makes painfully over decades. Terror moves us on to the easy downhill track of modern authoritarian despotism.

Demands:
1. We demand the immediate release and unconditional withdrawal of cases against Chandramohan.
2. We demand that the suspension order against the Dean be revoked immediately.

Signed/-
A. Suneetha
Coordinator,

Anveshi Research Centre for Women’s Studies
And
Rasna Bhushan,
curator,

Vidyasagar’s Art Centre

Faked Cultural Encounters in Gujarat - Dilip Chitre

2007-05-16T17:47:00.000+05:30

Faked Cultural Encounters in Gujarat

Dilip Chitre

We have heard of faked police encounters with alleged terrorists in Gujarat and elsewhere. Power vested in the police is abused in such cases and they act in contempt of the Constitution of India and sometimes violate even the (outdated) criminal procedure code and the (outmoded) Indian Penal Code designed by the British to deal with a subject people and not with citizens of a free country.

The case of art student Chandramohan of the M.S.University of Baroda falls in the category of faked cultural encounters of the sort ‘popularized’ by organizations such as the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad who, in their zeal to for a Semitized Hindutva fundamentalizing and hegemonizing Indian culture and society, now invade university campuses, art galleries, film clubs, libraries, research centres and so on seemingly without impunity. Gujarat is supposedly Hindutva’s premier social and cultural laboratory setting a blazing example for the rest of India.

The Gujarat formula for faked cultural encounters is simple and would appeal to the latent reserves of power among culturally illiterate masses. Politicized student organizations (such as the ABVP) will provide them the lead in violent demonstrations of protest on the basis of ‘hurt sentiments’, an ailment that threatens to assume epidemic proportions because the virus for it seems to have been successfully developed in Hindutva’s laboratory.

It is a virus that selectively attacks all but fundamentalist Hindus. It was reportedly developed to eliminate ‘the three ‘M’s from Gujarat: the Muslims, the Mahatma, and the Macauleyans (meaning those educated since Macaulay introduced his Minute on Indian Education in 1835 according to modern Western ideas). Humanism, liberalism, rationalism, secularism, artistic expression, dissenting opinion, scientific research are some of the soft targets of this virus.

The Fine Arts Faculty of the M.S. University is only a symbolic target. But so was Babri Masjid. We are not discussing art or religion here. We are considering the right to pursue alternatives according to our own faith and beliefs. We are also expressing concern over coercion, suppression, and threats to public order and peace who threaten riots because their ‘sentiments are hurt’. We will soon become a republic governed by majority sentiment rather than legislative rationality and judicial wisdom, political far-sightedness and the guarantee of cultural freedom and plurality.

Will the Gujarat ‘laboratory’ succeed once again? For the sake of the Constitution of India and the future of the republic founded on it, one hopes the entire nation will condemn the perpetrators of such barbaric and fanatical interventions in the evolution of democracy in India and its autonomous institutions.

Let us turn to history to understand the gravity of the threat the ultra rightist fronts pose to our Constitution itself. On May 10, 1933 student groups in universities across Germany carried out book burnings to destroy works they considered ‘un-German’ in spirit. Six years later, Adolph Hitler invaded Poland and launched what became the Second World War.

What has commenced in Gujarat may spread to the rest of India if not checked in time. In the Chandramohan case, while the national media have reported the wide sympathy and support to the Fine Arts Faculty of the M.S.University, the victimised student and the Dean of the faculty, the Gujarati press has been either silent or has given only one-sided coverage of the entire sordid affair.

This silence is ominous. It is like Germany’s silence during the holocaust. Or, to take a historically and geographically closer example, it is like the silence of Afghanistan during the Taliban regime.

In this, the sixtieth year of our independence, is intolerance all that we have learnt to tolerate? Do we want to lock up our artists and writers for not conforming to the ideology of fanatics? Do we want hoodlums to enter our universities and dictate terms to the faculty and the students? Do we want public libraries and museums to be the next targets of organized vigilantes and vandals?

(ENDS)

Editorial - Dilip Chitre

2007-05-16T17:46:00.000+05:30

Editorial

Who is Afraid of Fundamental Rights?

An expected, but bizarre, public response in Maharashtra to the recent lifting of a ban on James Laine’s book Shivaji---Hindu King in Muslim India---provokes me to write this. Author Laine’s effigies were burnt in several places and his publisher, Oxford University Press were warned against selling the book. The Chief of the Shiv Sena urged the public to burn copies of the book. Other political parties joined him in the demand.

Then, on May 9, 2007 The Times of India shockingly reported that the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute that had been vandalized purportedly by people offended by a passage in Laine’s book, has now decided to support a ban on Laine’s book. (A research institute seeking ban on a book? That is unheard of! )--- The B.O.R.I. was reportedly seeking a ban on Laine’s book in view of a recent ruling by the Supreme Court rejecting an appeal challenging the Karnataka government’s banning the book Dharmakarana that allegedly hurts the sentiments of the followers of saint Basaveshvara and the Veerashaiva community.

‘Hurt sentiments’ now threaten to become a judicially acceptable ground for banning works of scholarship, literature, and art---some of them alleged to be maliciously motivated. Most of the people ---who claim to be ‘hurt’--- claim so on religious and sectarian grounds. They also take the law in their hands as they did in vandalizing the B.O.R.I. and got away without any punishment from the government of Maharashtra.

Then there was the ‘public outcry’ against the Hollywood actor, Richard Gere’s
mock-erotic on-stage foreplay with Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty at an AIDS-awareness show. This is supposed to have ‘hurt public sentiments’. A PIL was filed against Gere and an overenthusiastic magistrate promptly issued an arrest warrant against the American actor. The magistrate has been transferred since. The frivolity of such complaints ought to be prevented by law. There has to be legislative protection, for instance, for artists such as M.F.Hussain who has been harassed by known vigilante organization with no respect for the values of civil society.

These various instances of ‘public outcry’ seem unrelated; but they are not. They point to the fact that though 57 years have passed since this nation embraced its Constitution, few Indians have grasped the implications of the fundamental rights it enshrines. These rights are the foundation of a liberal, democratic, secular and civil society respectful of its own plurality. They are not the legacy of the British Empire, as some believe; they are the foundation of a new and modern secular nation-state, where all citizens are equally empowered, and where the state and an individual are also equal in the eyes of the law. Also, it has to be understood that secularism is a commitment to neutrality towards all religious and sectarian beliefs and practices; and not equal sensitivity to every religious sentiment. By the way, what is religious sentiment? What is cultural tradition? In a multicultural and multireligious society, can such sentiments be used to tyrannise dissent, prevent debate and discussion, and ultimately to make a mockery of fundamental rights? Will government actions and judicial decisions be dictated by threats from rioters, vandals, arsonists, and their extra-legal armies?

Our founding fathers bitterly argued its many features before ratifying our Constitution. What they did not realize, then, was how the Indian polity and its many constituent factions would translate it into practice. They did not realize, for instance, that caste Hindu politics would become stronger rather than melt away. They did not realize that Hindu revivalism and Muslim fundamentalism would temporarily lie low only to explode into communal riots, pogroms, and state-abetted genocide just fifty years later. They did not realize that adult franchise would not automatically result in cleaner electoral politics. The did not foresee the slow and steady rise of populism, linguistic and cultural chauvinism, waves of xenophobia, and a decline in civil order.

They also failed to see that the British Empire’s real legacy would be its bureaucratic apparatus and the police that were intended to rule a subject people and not citizens with their rights in place.

In these, they left what has now become the foundation of corruption and abuse of power. It is an intriguing point whether the elected representatives of people corrupt the bureaucrat or vice versa. It is just as hard to tell whether money is translated into electoral power or it is the other way round. The apparent wealth of newly risen politicians and political parties, as well as vigilante groups that go on a rampage when their ‘sentiments are hurt’ goes unnoticed by internal revenue officials, themselves under pressure from politicians.

When the judiciary defends the Constitution that is found variously inconvenient by people with anti-Constitutional interests, judicial activism is seriously discussed by those who believe that Parliament is above the Constitution. They do not pause to ask whether judicious legislation is not the real answer to judicial activism or intervention.

It is assumed by most people in India that the electoral system is for laundering the character of any contestant. Most Indians see democracy as rule by the majority and values as something that popularity polls decide. People with criminal records believe that if they could become legislators, they could themselves be the law that they already think they are. This absurd logic seems to have a lot of support, too.

Banning any book is restricting citizens’ right to read. Banning a controversial book is to shroud in secrecy the alleged controversial elements in it without reasonable public discussion and debate. A section of the public, or even a majority of public opinion, cannot claim that what hurts its sentiments should therefore be hidden from everyone else. As for burning books, Adolph Hitler---Mr. Thackeray’s hero---tried to create a fascist culture out of the smoke of burnt books. He failed. However, some Indians still feel they will succeed by making illiteracy and uncivil behaviour the ideals of their followers.

Our Constitution treats us all as equals regardless of our gender, religion, caste, and creed. However, it does not ban the Manusmriti, the Holy Koran, the Old and the New Testament, and other sacred books that make all those discriminations. It simply empowers us to make a choice of faith and belief. Our Constitution does not tell men and women what to wear, or what to eat, or what to see, or what to read, or what to think. We are a secular state that draws no lines between the sacred and the profane. Our state is concerned solely with this-worldly good governance and common public interest.

Lord Acton, the great 19th century English historian of liberty, observed, “It is bad to be oppressed by a minority, but it is worse to be oppressed by a majority. For there is a reserve of latent power in the masses which, if it is called into play, the minority can seldom resist.” He, then, goes on to warn us, “But from the absolute will of an entire people there is no appeal, no redemption, no refuge but treason.”
Our electoral system is based on universal adult franchise. It threatened caste Hindus with the prospect of facing empowered dalits, scheduled castes, and tribes. It unsettled Hindu revivalists by raising the spectre of the power of collective Muslim votes. It is now making men fear women voters.

None of these fragments of the nation’s polity, at any level, want a secular national mainstream to emerge. They do not even want to think about it. They have been forced into alliances with their traditional enemies. What they share in common is not the love of democracy but its fear. They prefer populist protest, violent demonstration, and public exercise of majority muscle to discussion, debate, or any other rational response to what they do not agree with.

“Hurt sentiments’ is a euphemism for ‘justified anger’ whose violent public expression is considered lawful.

Threatening a riot over any self-expression a group of people disagrees with has become a political tool that hides behind existing laws.

Take the recent case of Chandramohan, a fine arts student of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda. A local lawyer, Niraj Jain, invaded the university campus with a bunch of goons to disrupt the young artist’s in-faculty and on-campus exhibition which was not meant for the public. He demanded that the exhibition be immediately closed. He also had the art student arrested.

The Dean of the Fine Arts Faculty, who stood firmly behind the student, has since been suspended by the Vice Chancellor of the University. This is obviously a case of political orchestration and a threat to incite the public against a minority---in this case an academic institution, its faculty, and its student community. The Bajrang Dal, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the B.J.P. and their invisible mentors the R.S.S. are obviously involved in this ugly affair. The Vice Chancellor is a political appointee and a B.J.P. government is in power in Gujarat.

Politicians and leaders of every ilk are afraid that the Constitution has made India increasingly unpredictable in the last 57 years. They find that the wrong people are empowered by the Constitution: the dalit, women, or even the dissenting intellectual, scholar, writer, or the avant garde artist. So most of them direct their rage and desperation against the very book they take an oath of allegiance to, namely the Constitution of India. However, they do this cleverly by misusing and frivolously interpreting certain sections of the Indian Penal Code.

We are fortunate to be over one billion people ruled by a Constitution that does not allow any minority or majority to oppress the individual. We are fortunate to speak many languages, practice different religions, and have regional traditions that vary. We are lucky to be recognized as individuals equal before one law.

However, how many democracies can a single nation-state hold? The individual, from whose rights our state itself derives its sanctity, is in a permanent minority of one. From that minority of one emerge smaller or larger consensual groups, whether they are religious, ethnic, linguistic, or sectarian. The right to express oneself, the right to debate with others and to argue against them, the right to publicize opinion and to criticize it, the right to question beliefs, the right to propagate views---all these are interrelated and inseparable.

Are we in a state of social, cultural, and political anarchy not apprehended by our founding fathers 57 years ago? Is our system beginning to crumble under the weight of our massive population and its variegated constituents? Why do so many people in the ruling class find our Constitution increasingly inconvenient? Why is everybody afraid of fundamental rights?

The rights of the individual are the cornerstone of our Constitution. Those who seek to curtail those rights by demanding bans on books, paintings, plays, films, or public shows that ‘hurt their sentiments’ should openly say that the Constitution of India hurts their sentiments most. They should also openly confess that they would not hesitate to resort to inciting public feelings, causing riots, and provoking arson and looting should the law not bend in their favour.

Dilip Chitre

Protest Demonstration agains events in Baroda: From Lalit Batra

2007-05-15T19:57:00.000+05:30

Via: Shuddhabrata Sengupta

Dear All,

(apologies for cross posting on Vikalp, Commons Law, Reader List and CAC
lists)

I have recieved a mail from Lalit Batra, about a protest demonstration
against Chandramohan's (the MSU Baroda art student) and the closure of
exhibitions at the faculty of fine arts, MSU Baroda, and the suspension
of faculty (Shivji Pannickar) planned for tomorrow, 12th of May, at 3
p.m. at Gujarat Bhawan, Chanakya Puri, Near Ashoka Hotel, New Delhi.

Anyone wanting to contact Lalit Batra about this (or for more
information can call Lalit at 9899091413)

I am pasting the message from members of the faculty (Bina Sriniviasand
and Shivji Panickkar) that Lalit circulated below. Although everyone on
this list is by now familiar with this story, this notice does have
details of the sections of the penal code under which Chandramohan is
being charged - Sections 153A and 114, along with Section 295. I would
urge everyone to pay attention especially to the wonderful alliance
between VHP activists and Christian priests in Gujarat, against the
freedom of expression of a student.

Further, here are some details about the relevant sections:

Section 153A: Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of
religion, race etc, commiting acts prejudicial to the harmony of the public

According to the section whoever by words or expression promotes enmity
between different groups of the country on the grounds of religion,
race, place of birth, residence, language, or any such grounds or
commits an act which is prejudicial to the harmony of he public is
culpable under the section with imprisonment which may extend to three
years with or without fine. Further, when the offence is committed on
any religious place or any place worship the imprisonment can extend to
5 years with or without fine. The offence is non-bailable and even
cognizable (after 1898) ie. Police can arrest a person under the section
without warrant.

Section 295: Injuring or defiling place of worship with intent to insult
the religion of any class

Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object
held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby
insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge
that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage
or defilement as a insult to their religion, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two
years, or with fine, or with both.

Section 295A: Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage
religious feelings

Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or
any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs 295A.
Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or
any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.

Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the
religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either
spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or
otherwise, insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious
beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or
with both.

Section 114 is about abetment and presence when any crime is being
committed.

As a close reading of these sections would suggest, the problem lies not
only with the act, but also with the idea of intention.

The problem is, Chandramohan's lawyers can at best argue that his
actions are not evidence of his intentions. However, an artist is such
only because his actions have deliberation. Thus, to save Chandramohan
the person from a prison sentence, his lawyers might have to jettison
Chandramohan's identity as an artist. Such an argument, given the
circumstances that the images in question were made for an exam of the
fine arts department, may be impossible, or at the very least, difficult
to sustain,

The reason that distinguishes between the scrawls made by a chimpanzee
and an abstract expressionist has to do with the idea of intention. To
protect Chandramohan's act as an instance of un0 malicious behavious, it
has to be freed from the matrix of artistic intention. We cannot really
quarrel about the purport of the intention, because the onus of proving
hurt, has to do not with the hurter, but with the hurtee.

Hurt, is a subjective feeling, and as long as the hurt say that they
feel their pain, we are in no position to debate whether their pain or
humiliation is real or imagined. There cannot, in fact be, imagined or
feigned pain, because a court is in no position to measure the intensity
of feeling on any given issue. Thus when a person says that their
religious sensibilities are hurt, a court has to listen, (if the injury
to sensibilities is mentioned as a cause of harm). Chandramohan cannot
say that he intended to cause pain. He can only say that he intended to
cause meaning to be read into his actions. If someone says that they
read meaning in his actions in a manner that caused them pain, there is
very little that Chandramohan or his lawyers can say in defence against
such a charge

The only thing that can be debated is the question of whether or not
there was 'intention'in the first place. As an artist, Chandramohan
cannot run away from intention.

Therefore the only recourse that anyone wishing to protect the freedom
of speech in this case is to subject the law itself to criticism, not to
speculate about whether it's application in this case is an instance of
its misreading.

This means arguing for a straightforward assault on sections 153 and
295. The only way that an artist or a writer's freedom of speech can be
protected against religious zealots is through a complete and total
repeal of sections 153 and 295.

Having said that, arguing for these provisions to be struck down also
means accepting the right of the Hindutva forces to insult and (through
speech acts, signs, and visual representations) humiliate and attack
people of other religions and convictions.

I have no problem with that, but many who will rightly condemn the
freedom of Chandramohan to act as he has done, will also call for bans
on the 'hate speech' of those who have moved the machinery of law and
order against him.

Let it be understood that to do that will only invite further assaults
on the freedom of art students like Chandramohan in the future.
Meanwhile, I would urge everyone to attend as many meetings and
protests, as possible on this issue, and make people aware of the
draconian nature of sections 153 and 295.

best

Shuddh

An attack on cultural freedom: Mumbaikars

2007-05-15T19:35:00.000+05:30

http://www.hindu.com/2007/05/15/stories/2007051504391200.htm

'Free art, fight fascism'

2007-05-15T19:34:00.000+05:30

MUMBAI: From painters and poets to dancers, film-makers, students, actors, journalists, bloggers, trade unionists, lawyers, bureaucrats, and even the President of the Bombay Rotary, it was a rainbow coalition of over 200 liberals who came together on the pavement outside the city's oldest public artspace, the Jehangir Art Gallery, to protest the way in which the Baroda police had arrested Chandramohan, a student at the M S University, on grounds of "promoting enmity between different groups".

As part of his final examination, Chandramohan had put up three religious-themed prints. The exhibition was meant for only examiners and students. On Wednesday, VHP members, led by Nitish Jain, attacked the installations and demanded Chandramohan's arrest. He was immediately arrested and released on bail on Monday after five nights in jail.

Organised by the Free Chandramohan Committee, the Jehangir demonstration was informally moderated by Kekoo Gandhi, the eminence grise of the Mumbai art scene, and art critic Ranjit Hoskote.

The steps served as an impromptu stage to which speaker after speaker stepped up to make their statements. Seated right in front was Tyeb Mehta, who despite his fragile health, had travelled all the way from Lokhandwala Complex, to register solidarity. M F Husain also sent a painting. Many in the audience wore placards which read 'Don't Sing, Dance, Paint, Write, Love. Live in Fear.'

Another poster, in a nod to Gandhigiri, read, "Nitish Jain, Get Well Soon."

A number of speakers condemned the "fascist state of Narendra Modi" and drew comparisons with the Nazis whose rise to power was marked by the burning of books and clamping down on art. Quoting Martin Neimoller's 'First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak up...' poem, former civic chief Jamshed Kanga said one should strike out against "this moral policing that is totally immoral".

Journalist Anil Dharker spoke out against Manoj Soni, the vice-chancellor of the MS University, who had failed to stand up for his student. Dharker said one could expect little from a vice-chancellor "whose only claim to fame is that he wrote a book about the Gujarat carnage and endeared himself to Narendra Modi".

Sudha Varde, the veteran socialist, said writers and artists had often been at the receiving end of political censorship, and cited the example of Vijay Tendulkar who was targeted by the Shiv Sena.
Senior artist Jehangir Sabavala made the point that in a democracy there were many ways to tackle issues but "not in this savage way where you storm a university, a sanctified space. This whole fascist tendency must be put down".

"I am speaking as a Gujarati," said writer Prabodh Parikh to applause. "I am proud to be a Gujarati and I wish to say there is another Gujarati identity that is not Narendra Modi and not Mahatma Gandhi. It is the modern-minded Gujarati who lives in Bombay."

Among those present were artists Mehli Gobai, Jaideep Mehrotra and Julius Mcwan; poets Arjun Dangle, Imtiaz Dharker and Anand Thakore; mill unionist Datta Ishwalkar; Tasneem Mehta of heritage group Intach, publisher Bina Sarkar Ellias; film-makers Saeed Mirza and Chitra Palekar; actress Konkona Sen, dancer Jhelum Paranjape; theatre director Pratap Sharma; and free software advocate Vickram Crishna who even broadcast the meeting on 96 FM.

toireporter@timesgroup.com

Artists cheer Chandramohan’s release from Vadodara jail

2007-05-15T19:33:00.000+05:30

Prominent personalities from various walks of life had voiced their protest against ‘suppression of free thought’

Express News Service

Mumbai, May 14: IT was a protest that turned into a celebration, when news of young artist Chandramohan Srilamantula’s release from a jail in Vadodara reverberated across Mumbai’s cultural circuit. The citizens who had gathered outside Jehangir Art Gallery on Tuesday marked the occasion with applause and cheer.

However, though the mood was jubilant, those gathered outside the gallery, along with the Free Chandramohan Committee, made it a point to emphasise that the struggle for freedom of expression was not quite over.
“Our task is not over. We still have to protect the rights of academic institutes to nurture free expression and thought and secure Dean Shivji Panikkar’s reassignment to his post,” said art-critic Ranjit Haskote.

Earlier, on May 9, members of Vishwa Hindu Parishad, led by local BJP leader Niraj Jain, stormed into the campus of Faculty of Fine Arts, MS University in Vadodara and abused and attacked Srilamantula claiming that they found his work obscene and offensive to religious sentiments.

The whole incident evoked strong reactions everywhere. In Mumbai, two hundred people including prominent personalities from various walks of life like artist Tyeb Mehta, Jehangir Sabavala, gallery owner and art champion Kekoo Gandhy, art-critic Ranjit Hoskote, filmmaker Chitra Palekar, danseuse Jhelum Paranjepae, actresses Konkona Sen and Ayesha Dharkar, playwright Pratap Singh and several others gathered at the Jehangir Art Gallery with banners that read ‘Down with Moral Policing’ and ‘Defend our Cultural Freedom’.

“Incidents like these are not isolated and concern all of us since it's something to do with violation of our civil liberties,” said art-critic Hoskote. Dharkar pointed out that it was disappointing that Pro Vice Chancellor of the Maharaja Sayajirao University rusticated the Dean.

Painter MF Hussain too sent his message via fax from London. He sent a painting that depicted the fall of democracy and the oppression of free thought. Theatre person Nadira Babbar said, “MF Hussain has not been able to see the play Pencil Se Brush Tak which we dedicated to him because he is unable to return home. We should be ashamed at the way we have given in to fundamentalist forces. It is time to raise our voices,” she said.

Paranjepae added: “Even Indian classical dance derives its mudras from Indian’s erotic sculptures. Are we going to ban that next?”

Chandramohan set free - Judge says he did not have mala fide intention, nor was he a threat

2007-05-15T19:24:00.000+05:30

Express News Service
Posted online: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 at 0000 hrs

VADODARA, MAY 14 : MSU student Chandramohan was released on bail today after five days in jail on charges of “objectionable art work” and threatening national integration. Senior Civil Judge M J Parashar in his order said Chandramohan had not painted with mala fide intention, neither was he a threat to public peace if released. The judge also observed that the student had no criminal background. Niraj Jain, who lodged the complaint in the first place, has decided not to move the Gujarat High Court in the matter.
Parashar granted Chandramohan unconditional bail for Rs 5,000, which was paid by faculty of fine arts teacher Santosh Das, following counsel Narendra Parmar’s arguments. Parmar is a former syndicate and senate member of MSU. However, Chandramohan was ordered to notify the police if he planned to leave the state or country while the case was on. After his release at around 5 pm, only Parmar and the media were present to meet the student.
When asked whether Chandramohan would pursue the case in the Gujarat High Court, Parmar refused to answer and said he would take a decision later.
Meanwhile, university authorities denied permission to MSU alumni and artists from all over country to enter the fine arts faculty premises today. But the protesters went ahead with their of show of solidarity for Chandramohan and suspended faculty dean Shivaji Panikar, as they milled around the faculty gate.
However, things turned ugly when an ABVP-led group arrived at the spot and hurled abuses at the peaceful demonstrators. They even targeted human rights activist Shabnam Hashmi who was in city to support the demonstration. Finally at around 3 pm, the ABVP group forced the alumni association members to disperse.

( www.artconcerns.com ) Human Chain in Baroda

2007-05-15T19:09:00.001+05:30

Artists from all over India came to Baroda on 14th May 2007 and they formed a human chain in front of the Faculty of Fine Arts in order to send a message to the government and the hooligans that the art community is one and together. A report from Baroda.

14th May 2007 (Monday) was a crucial day for Baroda. The students and the faculty members reached the Faculty of Fine Arts for preparing the evening’s protest march. Strict measures were imposed by the University authorities so that only the students and faculty members with identity cards were allowed to enter inside the campus. “On Sunday night the university authorities made some special meetings to curb the protest and also the made orders to bring in security forces to control the entry and exit in the faculty,” one of the Faculty members told www.artconcerns.com.

By 12 in the morning the happy news reached the artists community. The arrested student, Chandramohan was released on a bail bond of Rs.5000. He was whisked away by the students and activists special wing and he is reported to have told not to talk to the media till the problems are solved. The students and activists are said to have keeping vigil to ensure the artist’s security. The lawyer who appeared for Chandramohan said that his affairs will be conducted smooth in future. Meanwhile, the suspended Dean of the Faculty, Dr.Shivji Panikkar continued to hide on Monday also. The state has not yet ensured the security to his life and property.

The protest meeting was supposed to happened by 2 pm. The alumni members and other artists camping in Baroda since the outbreak of problems reached the faculty in the morning itself. However, they were not allowed to enter the faculty. Following their heels the ABVP activists also reached the scene shouting slogans. Around fifty artists and art workers came to Baroda from Mumbai, Delhi and other parts of the country to express their solidarity.

As decided the protest meeting started at 2 pm and the police appeared soon. They asked the protestors to disband and threatened that more police force would be called in case of emergency. The artists said that they were doing peaceful demonstration, which the police was not ready to buy. They suspected escalation of violence thanks to the presence of the BJP, ABVP activists in the vicinity. The police arrested around twenty five students and kept them in custody for a few hours. Later they were released.

After much deliberation, the artists decided to call off the evening protest rally and formed a human chain along the Fateganj- Sayajiganj road. The media was present in full force and the artists demonstrated peacefully. The alumni representatives said that as the official holidays start from this week, the agitation would be resumed by June 15th once the faculty reopens. They said that they would continue their agitation until justice is gained. The artists who are camping in Baroda from Mumbai said that they would intensify the campaign from their respective locations so that the heat of the protest is not diminished. They condemned the university authorities and the state government for taking callous approach towards the Faculty of Fine Arts issue. They congratulated the artists community all over India, which is fighting for justice from their own places and extending support to Chandramohan and Dr.Shivji Panikkar.
More reports on ( www.artconcerns.com )

Protest letters from UK

2007-05-15T10:21:00.000+05:30

To whom it may concern:

I learn with the utmost concern of recent events affecting the Fine Arts
College in Baroda. The invasion of the university premises and the
arrest and jailing of a student obviously all form part of a concerted
attack on the free academic activities of an institution that enjoys a
world-wide reputation for the excellence of its teaching and the high
standard of its academic achievements.

For a number of years, while I was Professor at the Painting School of
the Royal College of Art in London, I was invited to teach in the Fine
Art Faculty at Baroda. I did so for several months, and remember this
period as being one of the most fruitful and rewarding times of my long
academic career.

It would appear to me essential that the competent authorities move with
the utmost speed to terminate any acts of intimidation and to restore
full democratic rights to a very remarkable Indian institution that can
be seen to uphold the quality and democratic freedom for which it is
justly renowned.

Yours faithfully,

Peter de Francia
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What a horrific set of events and descent into chaos. It always appears that fundamentalists are still
the most afraid of the power of the image.

I am sending your e mail and info of events so far on to press contacts I have here to see if it can become international news.

I fully support your campaign and I hope that Chandra and Prof Panniker are vindicated in there actions for freedom for
the artist against this attempt to bully and to silence.

Best wishes

Dexter

CUBITT
Dexter Dalwood
8 Angel Mews, London N1 9HH
tel: +44 (0) 20 7833 9962
dexter@kaydex.freeserve.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We fully support Dr. Shivaji Panikkar and Chandramohan. I will personally convene a meeting a meeting on the 14th of May in London at the Central Saint Martins College of art and design in strong opposition to right wing politics. We will also approach the local press and try to publish any further news we get on this matter.

Please send us your opinions about this issue on the following ids so that we can display these messages in our meeting.

Those of you who will be able to attend the meeting at the Faculty of Fine Arts please oblige to photograph the event and send them to us.

Thank you,

HImanshu Desai
shivasjazz@yahoo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mark Cazalet, Faculty of Fine Arts Alumni .

I am dismayed to hear of this extremely serious development at theFaculty.Is there anything I can do to help? Perhaps the validation of externalartists might cause local politicians to reflect on the status,influence and significance of the MSU FA dept. As you know I will bepermanently indebted to my eighteen months at Baroda, a life longcatalyst for my work, and vision of the great country and culturalpluralism that India contains. It sounds as though an entirely selfmade tragedy is underway whose end will be a regressive reduction from all that is vibrant and vital about MSU's work.

all best Mark
m.j.cazalet@btopenworld.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Protest Meetings

2007-05-15T10:07:00.000+05:30

PROTEST; 6 PM 14TH OF MAY, LALIT KALA ACADEMY, MANDI HOUSE NEW DELHI

Artists from New Delhi, Bangalore, Cochin, Mumbai, Vishakapatnam, Hyderabad, Guwahati, Kolkata and Santiniketan will come together on May 14 at 6 pm to register their protest against the highhanded action taken by the police under the instigation of a local politician against Chandramohan, a student from the Arts Faculty of Baroda University. 23-year-old Chandramohan, a final year MVA student, has been in police custody since May 9 when outside elements forced their way into the premises of the Faculty of Fine Arts, M S University, Baroda, without permission from the Faculty or University and prevailed upon the police to arrest him. Charging him under non-bailable Sections, they also imposed immediate closure of the examination work that was underway.
As a mark of protest, artists from the different cities will congregate to raise their collective voice against this violation of freedom of expression and autonomy of educational institutions. They will extend solidarity to the staff and students of Faculty of Fine Arts, Baroda, who have not only stood steadfast with the incarcerated student Chandramohan, but have over many decades painstakingly built an academic institution of great repute and distinction. The Art History Department of M S University of Baroda is recognized all over the world as a center of excellence.

http://indersalim.livejournal.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Condemning the arrest of Chandramohan, art student, on 9th May 2007 and the suspension of Shivaji Panikkar, Dean of Faculty of Fine Arts on 10th May 2007 at Maharaja Sayajirao University, Baroda.

Issued by Anveshi Research Centre for Women’s Studies
And
Vidyasagar’s Art Centre
Hyderabad

Released at a protest meeting supported by Shrishti Art Gallery, Hyderabad
On Sunday, 13th May 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Friends,

Even as we were holding a press conference in solidarity with M.F. Husain at the Press Club in Delhi on Tuesday, 9 May, another assault on artistic freedom took place in Baroda. A BJP leader, accompanied by the local police, entered the Faculty of Fine Arts at MS University, and attacked the work of an art student, Chandramohan, exhibited as part of the internal review process of the university. Chandramohan was arrested and is yet to be granted bail. Further, on 11 May, the
university authorities closed down an exhibition of classical Indian art put up by the students and
suspended the acting Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, Professor Shivaji Panikkar.

We are holding a large protest meeting on the lawns of Rabindra Bhavan, Mandi House, New Delhi on Monday, 14th May, at 6 pm.

We have also urged the leaders of all secular political parties to send their representatives/MPs to the protest meeting.

Please join us and extend your solidarity.

Ram Rahman & Vivan Sundaram

for SAHMAT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

support Dr. Shivaji Panikkar and Chandramohan

2007-05-14T00:17:00.000+05:30

We fully support Dr. Shivaji Panikkar and Chandramohan. I will personally convene a meeting on the 14th of May in London at the Central Saint Martins College of art and design in strong opposition to right wing politics. We will also approach the local press and try to publish any further news we get on this matter.

Those of you who will be able to attend the meeting at the Faculty of Fine Arts please oblige to photograph the event and send them to us.

Please send us your opinions about this issue on the following ids so that we can display these messages in our meeting.
Thank you,

HImanshu Desai
shivasjazz@yahoo.com

Artists unite against moral police. Supriya Sharma NDTV.COM

2007-05-13T14:53:00.000+05:30

http://communalism.blogspot.com/search/label/Hindutva

Painting row: Varsity dean suspended, Sahara Samay

2007-05-13T14:47:00.000+05:30

http://www.saharasamay.com/samayhtml/articles.aspx?newsid=75220

comment RS

2007-05-13T14:46:00.000+05:30

Shaji has expressed exactly what many persons like me feel.M F Hussain and other artists time and again take liberties in the subject matter of art. Hinduism is the most liberal of all religions. Hinduism does not impose compulsory visits to temples, observing fasts or daily rituals. Persons who defame religious icons whether in private examination hall or in an art gallery must take responsibility for the anguish caused to the sentiments of their hindu brethren.
Do they not know of the fatwa on the renowned author and the recent objections to Danish cartoons?
Niraj Jain has been given an opportunity to thrust himself to the limelight by this issue and he has grabbed it. Every chota politician whether Cong/BJP/SP/etc. never misses such a chance i. e. unless he/she is propelled by dynastic politics to rule over us.

read comments. Link

2007-05-13T14:42:00.000+05:30

http://www.ibnlive.com/news/baroda-university-dean-suspended/40421/comments.html#

Baroda university dean suspended. Achyuth Punnekat.CNN-IBN

2007-05-13T14:40:00.000+05:30

New Delhi: The Baroda Art controversy has taken a new twist. The dean of the Maharaja Sayajirao University's Fine Arts Faculty was suspended late on Friday night. Dean Shivji Panikker had come out openly in support of the students arrested for painting allegedly obscene works.

The University management has also closed down the exhibition where the paintings were on display.

BJP leader Niraj Jain said, “The students, teachers and the dean involved in this should immediately be suspended and if this is not done then the student leaders of Baroda will not remain silent."

That’s the demand the Hindutva brigade put forth after they vandalised this exhibition at the MS University on Wednesday for displaying allegedly obscene paintings.

And the University management seems to have completely bowed down to that fatwa. University top brass first refused to bail out the students who painted these works, when police arrested them.

And now the management has suspended the Fine Arts Faculty dean Shivji Panikkar after he openly supported his students.

MSU Fine Arts Faculty Dean Shivji Panikkar said, “Entire faculty of fine arts, staff, students and the artist community are with the student. I mean, the person is not even an artist. He's an art student. These are his creative works submitted for evaluation."

The University management reportedly decided to suspend Panikkar, after he refused to close down the controversial exhibition where the paintings were displayed.

Meanwhile, the arrested students are still in custody. One of them, Chandramohan, was produced in court on Friday.

The court has posted his bail hearing for Monday.

link

2007-05-13T14:14:00.000+05:30

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/videos.aspx?id=13598&slug=Art+assault%3a+Mumbai+gathers+in+support

Artists unite against moral police. Supriya Sharma NDTV.COM

2007-05-13T14:09:00.001+05:30

Supriya Sharma

Saturday, May 12, 2007 (Vadodara)

Quote
“ We have suffered enough. Cant allow this bullying to happen ”
- Shivaji Panikkar

The face-off between artists and the saffron brigade in Vadodara's M S University continues.

Members of the Fine Arts Faculty have gone on a mass casual leave in support of the suspended Dean, Shivaji Panikkar.

A local court meanwhile has extended the police custody of art student Chandra Mohan till Monday.

Chandra Mohan was attacked by VHP activists and jailed for so-called 'obscene art' but VHP activists are not satisfied. They now want Panikkar who defended Chandra Mohan's work to be arrested.

Autonomy at stake

Prof Panikkar, the dean in charge, was suspended on Friday night and has now gone into hiding, hounded by the moral police.

Panikkar met NDTV and broke down as he said this is a battle that now needs reinforcements. ''We have suffered enough. Cant allow this bullying to happen.''

There is enough support for Professor Panikkar, not just from artists but also from the university's teachers association.

Even a senate member argued that what is at stake is not just the freedom of an artist but the autonomy of an academic institution.

''Are we to allow people to walk into campus and tell us what we should be doing and what not. If this is allowed to happen then there's no end to it,'' said Prof Indraparamit Roy, faculty member.

''In the last few years, university has been taken over by the RSS. What you see today is ultimate saffronisation. Either you agree with us or else we bash you up. It is happening in appointments, promotions. The disgusting thing is the role of the Vice Chancellor who is meant to be a symbol of intellectual freedom,'' Prof Bandukwala, former faculty member.

Legal fight

On the face of it, this looks like solid support for the premier faculty of fine arts in what is one of the worst moments in its more than 50 years of history. But the odds against it are high.

BJP leaders argue that local leader Niraj Jain, who led the attack which ended in the student's arrest, did not violate the law.

''It is clear that the professors are misleading the students. No one has the right to hurt Hindu sentiment just because we are tolerant,'' said N V Patel, Head of Baroda BJP.

The student arrested is still behind bars, the dean stands suspended and the legal fight will have to be fought not just against VHP activist but against the university and as some would argue the law itself.

Art assault: Mumbai gathers in support NDTV.COM

2007-05-13T14:06:00.000+05:30

NDTV Correspondent
Sunday, May 13, 2007 (Mumbai)

Quote
“ Whatever is happening is totally unacceptable! You can't use Hinduisim as a basis for your actions. ”
- Kitu Gidwani, model and actor

Protests are spreading to other parts of the country after the arrest of an art student by the police in Baroda.

Artists and art lovers in Mumbai got together to express solidarity for the student of one of India's best known fine arts colleges.

The student Chandra Mohan is still in jail after being arrested by the Gujarat police for the portrayal of Hindu Gods, in so called obscene manner, while the Dean of the Faculty has been suspended after protesting the arrest of the student.

Fight for freedom

From painting canvases to preparing protest posters, for students at Baroda's faculty of fine arts the last two days have been a lesson.

They are learning what the fight for artistic freedom is all about. ''You can't be dictated and told what is art and what is not,'' said one. ''The person who should be punished is still outside,'' said another.

''Today it was students, yesterday Parzania. How long can we tolerate this? We have to raise our voice,'' said another protestor.

These voices found an echo in Mumbai, where artists and others gathered to show their support to the students of Baroda.

''I find it a very sorry and sad situation. I think freedom has to be guarded,'' said Jehangir Sabavala, Artist.

''Whatever is happening is totally unacceptable! You can't use Hinduism as a basis for your actions,'' said Kitu Gidwani, model and actor.

''I think this is something very disturbing. It's bamboozling the freedom of expression,'' said Govind Nihalani, Filmmaker.

''It's got to do with politicians who try to rabble rouse and take advantage of such situations,'' said Alyque Padamsee, Adman and theatre-person.

As the country speaks up against moral policing and curbs on artistic freedom, artists in Mumbai hope their voice will also be loud enough to free Chandra Mohan, the art student who under arrest in Baroda. (With inputs from Supriya S, Yogesh P, Laxman J, Ramesh S, Vasudevan)

Link

2007-05-13T14:00:00.000+05:30

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070011833

Baroda students to spend 6 days in jail CNN-IBN

2007-05-13T13:50:00.000+05:30

Posted Friday , May 11, 2007 at 21:42
Updated Friday , May 11, 2007 at 21:49
Email Print

OBSCENE ART: BJP activists led by leader Niraj Jain had damaged the paintings that were on display.

Other stories in the section

New Ddelhi: The two students of the Fine Arts Faculty Maharaja Sayajirao University in Vadodara arrested for painting what police considered obscene works of art will have to spend as many as six days in jail.

Chandramohan and Venkat Rao, who were arrested on Wednesday, were produced on Friday before a Baroda magistrate, who said that their bail application will be heard on Monday.

This is the second time they have been produced before a magistrate. The students were arrested by the police under charges of creating discord among groups by painting gods and godesses inappropriately.

On Wednesday, VHP and BJP activists had damaged the paintings in the hall where they were on display, claiming they were offensive.

Students of the university had protested protesting against the activists vandalising their exhibition. They are also protesting against the arrest.

But BJP leader Niraj Jain was not in the least apologetic claiming to have the support of Christian organisations as well. He threatened "action" against the university in no uncertain terms.

“The students should be thrown out of the university and the Dean also. This is something which is unacceptable,” Jain had said.

dom. spaceage@fsmail.net

2007-05-13T13:47:00.000+05:30

yes it seems like you are championing somewhat of a cause celebre, india sure is a strange and somewhat backward country, only this week i heard about one of the most famous artists in india, his name escapes me now, but he got into similiar hot water with distorted paintings of hindu gods, and then there was some court somewhere in north india that was trying to get a prision sentence for richard gere for kissing shilpa shetty ( an honoury brit now) a few times on the cheek, i mean who would'nt she's a damm fine piece of art if ever there was one,
anyhows, good luck with it all,
regards from afar,

Richard Cox Artist, Gallery Director, Senior Lecturer. Cardiff UK

2007-05-13T13:46:00.000+05:30

Dear Prof. Shivaji Panikker,

We have not met but I was briefly a visitor to Barada College of Art earlier
this year in late January and informally undertook some tutorials with
students on the MFA programme. I was impressed by the high level of
dedication, skill and commitment by those students I spoke to (at the behest
Sri Vasuderan Akkitham, Head of Painting).
As a Senior Lecturer at Cardiff School of Art & Design, University of Wales
Institute, with a long history of teaching at undergraduate and post
graduate level I have visited many colleges internationally, including
several in India. Baroda enjoys a strong reputation in the UK and I know
your institution to have links with the Royal College of Art, where I have
also taught in the 1980s.

I was distressed to hear of the serious and highly disrupting intrusion upon
your examination assessments by elements who trespassed on your premisses
and interfered with your evaluation process by an external jury.
This is deeply damaging to the academic process which was not open to the
public and should, therefore an internal matter to the college alone. Public
exhibitions are a different matter, this was not the case.

Academic freedom is one of the central tenants of education, the ability to
exercise and develop ideas in an atmosphere free of divisive censorship and
carried out observing the responsibilities that come with the open
acquisition of knowledge at university level.

Controversy has a long and honourable history in the visual arts and many
famous and important artists have dealt with difficult and challenging
subject matter in the pursuit of ideas and truth. George Gros, Otto Dix and
Goya all produced work whose shocking observations about the nature of war
were controversial in their day. Many of the images in Francis Bacons work
were be considered offence at different times. Clearly since I have not
seen the work of Chandra Mohan and will not know the nature of the
religious offence taken by those who trespassed in your college, so I cannot
comment.
What I do find offensive however is highly disruptive and damaging
intrusion on your colleges academic life and the treatment of the student in
question. Your own suspension and the sealing and closing of the Dept of
Art History together with the apparent lack of support of the senior
college authorities towards its own staff and students must be a major major
concern to all those who value art education and issues concerning
censorship.

Please accept my support in the defence of academic freedom as a crucial
principal, not knowing the exact circumstances but defending the autonomy
of a university such as your own to exercise its own judgement without
outside interference.

Richard Cox
Artist, Gallery Director, Senior Lecturer. Cardiff UK

richarcox55@hotmail.com

Chandramohan arrest draw protests across Tamil Nadu

2007-05-13T13:44:00.000+05:30

The arrest of art student Chandramohan in Baroda and subsequent happenings including the suspension of Dr Shivaji Panikker, Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts, MS University ,Baroda has sent shock waves in the world of art and culture in Tami Nadu.

Protests are being organized across the state against this assault on the sacred environs of a pre-eminent art institution in the country and on the idea of ‘free expression’ which is the very foundation of a democracy. The whole episode is seen by artists and writers in Tamil Nadu as an example of state terror and moral policing with the support of a fascist mob and brings into context once again the role of the State Government in Gujarat.

Artists and art students are gathering on Monday (6pm) at Hues Gallery in Chennai in a meeting called together by Professor Chandru, Principal of the Fine Arts College, Chennai together with art historians and writers Geetha Doctor and Sadanand Menon.
The meeting is to protest the arrest of Chandramohan and demand his immediate release and the re-instatement of Professor Shivaji Panikker in his position. Prof. Chandru, when asked his reaction to the happenings said that it was “very wrong”

Chennai based painter Asma Menon said that she is “shocked by the brutal and growing invasion of fascist forces into art portals” and said that she was “thinking about her children and their freedom of expression”. She said that it was “our duty to fight and defeat these threats to freedom” and that “the norms of artistic expression cannot be dictated by the state”.

Tamil Selvan, General Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers Association ,
talking from Madurai said that “ this is an example of the intolerance of fundamentalists
to the idea of free artistic expression” and “ it becomes a blatant act of fascism when it is supported by state terror”. He said that the Progressive Writers Association will be organizing protests across Tamil Nadu.

Artists, writers and cultural activists will be gathering in the premises of ‘Vamsi Books’ in Thiruvannamalai in the evening of Sunday, 12th May, to protest the arrest of Chandramohan and to demand his release. Contemporary Tamil short story writer Bawa Chelladurai who is calling together the gathering said that “a sustained campaign for freedom of expression is the need of the hour as this is not the first instance of moral policing and there is been a whole series of incidents in the country”.

Also in Thiruvannamalai veteran artist and art teacher (former Principal of the Fine Arts College in Chennai) A. P. Santhanaraj said that “it’s very sad”, but refused further comments as he was still to be appraised of the details of the story.

A report by Ananda Surya, poet and cultural activis,t from Thiruvannamalai, Tamil Nadu

Protest Letters / Statements

2007-05-13T11:22:00.000+05:30

We, the undersigned---artists, art lovers, and freedom loving citizens of India in Pune---condemn the shameful invasion of the Faculty of Fine Arts of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda by a coercive group of outsiders during an in-faculty viewing of the works of students and the illegal arrest of a student Chandramohan for showing allegedly obscene works.

The students of the faculty as a novel and educative protest against this terrorist act mounted an in-faculty exhibition of 2,500 years of erotic art in Indian history. The Vice Chancellor of the MSU ordered this exhibition to be dismantled, which the Dean of the Faculty of Arts refused to do in the absence of written orders. The Dean was suspended by the Vice Chancellor. The arrested student has now been released on bail.

The Chief Minister of Gujarat, the Home Minister of Gujarat, and the Vice Chancellor of MSU owe an explanation---if not an apology---to the people of India for violating the Constitution of India by ignoring due process and encouraging populistic vandalism. Our feelings---as citizens of India---are hurt by these blatant unconstitutional acts.

Artists, writers, scholars, dissidents, and non-conformists must be allowed to express themselves freely. Once their work is in the public domain its value can be debated in a civilized way. Such continuous free debate and discussion is the very breath of democracy. This is the way a civil society looks at liberty.

We deplore that this should happen in the year in which India celebrates sixty years of independence and fifty-seven years of its secular democratic Constitution.

This is a national issue and not a state or local issue. It concerns all of us as individuals and, in particular, artists and art educators as a cultural minority. They cannot be let browbeaten or manhandled by goondas, hooligans, and vandals.

We urge you to sign this statement in approval of the above sentiments.

SIGNATURE NAME ADDRESS Tel/Mobile/E-mail:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 11:12:49 +0530
Subject: IFA condemns attack on artistic freedom
India Foundation for the Arts pledges support for Chandramohan, Dr. Shivaji
Panikkar and the cause of artistic freedom

India Foundation for the Arts wishes to place on record its shock and
concern over the manhandling on May 9 of MS University Baroda, Fine Arts
Department student, Chandramohan by persons labelling his art work obscene
and offensive to religious sentiments. We are also deeply distressed about
the blatantly unfair suspension of Dean Dr. Shivaji Panikkar. Dr Panikkar is
one of the leading art historians of this country who has often and
generously shared his expertise with us.

This is a shameful moment in the history of our democracy. IFA calls upon
everyone in the arts community and outside it to lend their voices in
support of artistic freedom, civilised protest, open debate and tolerance
for diversity. Let us do all we can to ensure that Baroda never happens
again.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To,
Mrs Maneka GandhiMP,
Lok Sabha14
Ashok Road
New Delhi 10.5.2007

Dear Maneka
I am writing to you on behalf of the community of Indian artists,writers, and the larger fraternity of creative practitioners. As you may be aware, Chandramohan, a student of MS University Barodahas been arrested and kept in jail since May 9, as a consequence of anattack by VHP miscreants at a student examination at the universitypremises. The attack itself, and the fact that Chandramohan has beenheld on a nonbailable warrant is a cause for the most grievous concernfor the community at large. The dismantling of a peaceful exhibitionand the sealing of the art history department at MS University todayhas further exacerbated the situation. Coming on the heels of the sustained harassment of the senior artistMF Husain, the community of artists, writers and cultural activistshas been compelled to organize a series of protests at Baroda, Delhi,Mumbai and other cities and university centres in India. Given your close association with the arts both within government andat an individual level, we would request your specific support inraising a question in Parliament on monday, May 14 on the detentionand harassment of Chandramohan, within the larger and deeply troubledissue of freedom of expression in India. On behalf of the artist community I would also invite you to theprotest meeting at Delhi at the Lalit Kala Akademi at 6 pm on mondayMay 14, 2007.
Please do come and extend your support.

With warm regards
Gayatri Sinha
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

I share all of your deep shock and outrage at what has occured at the Fine
Arts Department at M.S.University, Baroda, in the course of the past few
days,. I do not have words strong enough to condemn the uncalled for police
intrusion into the campus, the arrest of the post-graduate student, Chandra
Mohan, and the violence and indignity meted out to him, the disruption of
the protest exhibition organized at the Fine Arts Department, and the
consequent suspension of the Dean of the Fine Arts Department, Shivaji
Pannikkar. All this, coming in the wake of the unabated attacks and the most
recent court summons on M.F. Husain, comes as a chilling warning about the
extreme vulnerability of our public positions as artists, intellectuals, and
academics. It underlines the urgency of our mobilization today in defence
not only of our private rights of opinion and expression but equally of the
public domain of our autonomy and intellectual positions. I write this brief
note to express my full sympathy and solidarity for senior and junior
artists like Husain and Chandra Mohan, and for my colleague and fellow
academic, Shivji, at this hour of crisis. I also wish to express my
admiration for the brave and committed stand that Shivji and the entire
fraternity of the Fine Arts Faculty has taken on this issue, and their
refusal to kowtow to the commands of the University authorities. My
colleagues at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta, will be
drafting a formal resolution and note of protest tomorrow to release to the
press, to coincide with the nation-wide protest meetings being organized
tomorrow (May 14) around these events. Meanwhile, I would be grateful if you
could circulate my note among the larger mailing group, and convey my
thoughts and support especially to Shivji.

Tapati Guha-Thakurta
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Hon. Anandiben Mafatbhai Patel, Minister for Education, State of Gujarat, min-edu@gujarat.gov.in
Hon. Narendra Modi, Chief Minister, State of Gujarat, mail@narendramodi.org
Hon. Y. R. Meena, Chief Justice, Gujarat High Court, rg-hc-guj@nic.in
Hon. L. K. Advani, BJP Minister and Leader of the Opposition, Lok Sabha, advanilk@sansad.nic.in

On Thursday, May 10, 2007, Inspector Jhale of the Sayajiganj Police Station in Vadodara along with a group of VHP members entered the annual student evaluation held at the Faculty of Fine Arts, M. S. University, Vadodara. They used violence against Mr. Chandra Mohan , a Master's Candidate in the Faculty of Fine Arts and the police arrested him without warrant and without any cognizable offence. The charge leveled against him after the arrest is obscenity. The police and the VHP group are evaluating with their violence a student's work produced for his Master's dissertation. We are also aware that the Faculty of Fine Arts, particularly its students led by their Dean, Dr. Shivaji Panikkar have protested this action in various ways. This has led to Dr. Panikkar's suspension.

We are writing to you to lodge a protest against this action. We protest the arrest of a citizen of India without warrant. We also protest the interference by people who are not the student's teachers. Educational institutions are spaces where students learn skills and gain knowledge. They must have the freedom to experiment without fearing censorship, violence and legal action. Their teachers must evaluate students, as Mr. Chandra Mohan was, and not by a mob of people who use violence. This is fundamental premise of education in a democracy.

The events Gujarat not only undermine the freedom to learn but also undermine teachers and our system of education. M.S. University has a fine history of progressive education. The Faculty of Fine Arts has produced India's most renowned artists and the Art History Department is the first to be established in independent India. It is also one of the few departments where students can pursue their education through the Ph D.

We understand that the bail hearing has been heard but the judgment has been postponed to Monday, May 15, 2007. We ask all of you to recognize the importance of Mr. Chandra Mohan's predicament, drop the case against him and restore the integrity of the relationship between students, their teachers and their educational institution. We are asking you reverse the suspension of Dr. Panikkar.

We hope that you will all work together and arrive at a speedy way to rectify this travesty of justice

Art, Resources & Teaching
79 Hutchins Road IInd Cross
St Thomas Town, Bangalore 560 084
+91.80.2580.0733 info@artscapeindia.org www.artscapeindia.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear All,
Forgive my resorting to a short cut. I am sending you a bcc of my letter to poet and art critic/historian Ranjit Hoskote to the shocking arrest of art student Chandramohan on the campus of the M.S. University, Baroda following a B.J.P. leader's objection to his works of art. The Dean of the Faculty of Fine Arts has been suspended by the Vice Chancellor for backing the
student-artist. You can follow the story in the media. It has chilling implications for the
future of civil liberties in India.
If you have any comments, feel free to send them to New Quest.
Dilip Chitre
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The incident at the Fine Arts College is yet another assault on democracy and freedom of expression. These fascist forces are getting away with their attack on basic human rights, because we are still not taking to the streets. There is a great urgency to save this country and we can't wait anymore for such incidents to happen. I am deeply saddened and just wanted
to express my solidarity with you and others who have taken a strong stand. Please convey the same to Chandra Mohan and other fellow members in this struggle. As you probably know, we are also gathering in large numbers (I hope!) at Rabindra Bhavan on the 14th at 6pm to protest against this cultural policing. In solidarity, Nandita Das
A-14 Gulmohar ParkNew Delhi-110049IndiaTel: +911126515387
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I EXPRESS MY SOLIDARITY.I AM OUT OF TOWN TILL THE END OF THE MONTH AND AM NOT ABLE TO ATTEND ANY OFTHE MEETINGS ,BUT I AM VERY MUCH THERE IN THE PROCESS OF PROTEST,WITH REGARDS,
N A V J O T
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

BJP offending cultural world

2007-05-13T11:19:00.000+05:30

BJP offending cultural world, says Maneka

AgenciesPosted online: Saturday, May 12, 2007 at 1554 hours IST

New Delhi, May 12: In a stinging attack on the saffron opposition to painter
M F Hussain's works and to an arts exhibition in a Gujarat university, BJP
MP Maneka Gandhi said the party and VHP activists have gone ‘too far’ in
their protests.
Bride Groom 18 - 24 25 - 30 31 - 35 36 - 45 46 - 50 50+India USA United Kingdom UAE Canada Australia Pakistan Saudi Arabia Kuwait
South Africa She also opposed the arrest of two arts students of M S University in
Vadodra in BJP-ruled Gujarat.
"VHP and BJP activists attacked and damaged their paintings. This is
unacceptable behaviour and I am sure, as a reasonable and open-minded
person, you will realise that we offend the entire cultural world and
thinking when we do this," she said in a letter to senior party leader L K
Advani.
The Pilibhit MP, who praised Hussain for his charity, alleged that his
paintings had been misread deliberately and suggested that they were worthy
of being displayed in a museum.
"Even if they have been interpreted correctly, and objected to, that is the
purpose of good art: to arouse debate, to create emotion and passion, to be
a means of communicating the artist's own thoughts.
"Otherwise, all art would be a mediocre representation of the real world and
would have no value except as a photograph imitative record of the world,"
Gandhi wrote.
She regretted that Hussain was living in a self-imposed exile in Dubai and
London apparently for fears he could be attacked because of his paintings.
"He should be here in India and we should have a museum of his works on
public display, instead of considering which ones to ban and destroy,"
Gandhi said as she requested Advani to advise the party in Gujarat and
Maharashtra to call off their campaign against Hussain.

From Alumni

2007-05-12T21:52:00.000+05:30

From: Mark Cazalet, Faculty of Fine Arts Alumni .

I am dismayed to hear of this extremely serious development at theFaculty.Is there anything I can do to help? Perhaps the validation of externalartists might cause local politicians to reflect on the status,influence and significance of the MSU FA dept. As you know I will bepermanently indebted to my eighteen months at Baroda, a life longcatalyst for my work, and vision of the great country and culturalpluralism that India contains. It sounds as though an entirely selfmade tragedy is underway whose end will be a regressive reduction from all that is vibrant and vital about MSU's work.

all best Mark
m.j.cazalet@btopenworld.com

Open letter to MSU V- C Manoj Soni

2007-05-12T21:29:00.000+05:30

FROM PANTUL KOTHARI – CEO INTEGRA ADVERTISING AND SENATE MEMBER FROM MANAGEMENT FACULTY- REGISTERED GRADUATES CONSTITUENCY

To, May 11, 2007
The Vice Chancellor
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda
Vadodara

Dear Manoj,

Its been more then one and half decade since we studied together at the Arts Faculty.
If you remember those times and the atmosphere then, there are some pleasant memories. The environment academic as well as extra curricular, is something Manoj we surely remember with foundness. You always were the prim and proper, the ideal student – the academic one. And I was the happy go lucky care a damn types. Having my finger in every pie right from theater to debating to elections, everything but academics. While I remember the good student, Manoj of then, who was a man of few words and carried himself with dignity and respect. And there is the Manoj the VC of today who somehow has been taken over by his ambitions and forgotten what as a student he got from the University. He seems to be appointed by powers – his masters and he is in total control of them as a puppet. Your actions since the last few years are absolutely shocking.

When you joined as VC here I was elated and came to meet you assuring you of all my support. But then your actions – which I cant believe are yours – you seem to be working on instructions of your masters. Having little control of what you are doing. Since you have taken over MSU has gone from frying pan to fire. You are singularly responsible for accelerating the decline of this lovely institution. Manoj you seem to be controlled by a group who has no interest in the progress of the University and they just want to rule the system. In the name of safronisation they are into very dirty power play and are hell bent on messing up and you seem to be in their total control so that you can continue as the Vice Chancellor. You are doing ‘justice’ to your designation- vice chancellor – you are for sure giving loads of CHANCES to all the possible VICES in the University.

My friend haven’t you changed a lot? You still carry the fixed smile from student days. Only thing is that the pleasant smile of then is replaced by a devilish fixed smile which is always there- seemingly enjoying the rape of the University.

What happened at the Fine Arts Faculty is simply shocking and unbelievable. The issue is not whether what the student had displayed was right or wrong. It is a separate matter. The issue is that outside fanatics in the name of culture or religion come into the campus and disturb the sacrosanct examination process, abuse and threaten academicians and students. And the university refuses to act. It is such a shame that instead of filing an FIR for trespass of University property and threats to teachers you and your bunch of cronies actually asked the teachers to apologize! How much will you fall and stoop to what levels to please your bosses? How much will your masters dictate your actions and you be part of their devious plans? My friend is there not even an iota of conscience left inside you? Are you just not bothered of your actions? I understand you did not take any action for nearly7 hours when the goons were roaming and terrorizing the faculty and students. Hundreds of students exams work was on display and the pieces of art were under threat of being damaged. You did not even feel once that you should act immediately. The exams were being disrupted and you did not care at all. Your office members came finally at 9.30 odd when the police was finishing the sealing of the display- exactly at that time. Looks as if you were part of the entire plan and were hand in glove with the goons. In fact till date the University has not taken any action against the alleged trespass. Isnt it shocking and shamefull.

The university is under your authority – if anything went wrong on it – it was you who was to act. Not Niraj Jain or anyone else. Or is it that you do not have any authority on the campus? And so you allow outside powers to take control. Manoj have things come to this level? I am sure you are holding on to your fixed smile as you read the letter – as your actions or rather lack of them would have got you more complements from your masters. And assured you maybe of another term as VC so that they can continue with your active support, their vices on the campus.

It is shocking that on the campus – which is like a large family we have outsiders ruling and the VC- who is supposed to be a respectable figure, a father figure to the University is encouraging them and asking senior academicians to apologise! If you allow me to be personal, in your house if your child or wife don’t listen to you or are wrong and don’t fall in line with the ideology of your masters – do you sort it out or call up Niraj Jain or some other fanatics to come and handle them? Threaten them? Abuse your wife and children and then maybe get them arrested? Surely not. Similiarly please don’t allow such rot to set on the campus. Please wake up my friend please do so.

And of course one little question from me –incidentally I am a Jain who prays twice a day and doesn’t have to wear a saffron band or get into hooliganism to prove that he is a good Hindu. The question I would like to ask your masters- if they are genuinely worried about peoples sentiments and religious purity etc--- do they ever wonder that during Ganesh Chaturti every single hour and every single day--- there is kajra re or bidi jaliale or such shit being sung and people most of them drunk dancing in front of gods idols? Similiarly during Navratri in Most of Gujarat, there is disco and filmi songs being sung in the name of Ma Ambe- doesn’t it pinch the religious moral police then? Would they find one painting or two objectionable at a college exam – which is purely internal and don’t mind their cadres in thousand dancing to obscene songs for days together at the Ganesh Pandals? Or they don’t have the guts to object there as it would be anti populist and possibly this is easier meat and gives them more publicity.
In fact the Fine Arts Faculty has preserved the traditional Garba with an absolutely traditional form of Garba at its Faculty. That is culture. What positive work has been done by the Saffron Brigade for Hindus? Except negative and destructive activities. We hindus are acting like fanatic extremists- let your masters know a true Hindus feelings.

It is sad that in the name of religion society is being hijacked and people like you who are at responsible posts- are behaving so shamelessly. I have seen and heard how the elections to senate, syndicate, promotions, threats to professors, arm twisting of academicians are taking place at the University by the so called saffron brigade goons. It is really sad – worse that you are an active part of it.

I don’t subscribe to any kind of religious insults and fanaticism from any religion Hindu, Christian or Muslim. And I repeat the issue here is not of what the student displayed – whether it was right or wrong. That was for you the authorities to decide in a civilized manner. It is an issue of letting hooligans enter rule and escape without any action – possibly with you and your cronies active support. And the tragedy that you instead asked the academicians for apology. It is extremely sad and distressful to see an old friend work like this. I may have been harsh, but have no regrets as you are doing much worse to the university. You are actually encouraging gang rape of the University, ofcourse you are smiling then too. And the fact that anyone sensible raises a voice in the University you brand him as anti BJP. Believe me I have always been a BJP voter supporter – but what you are guys are doing is extremely disgusting and will lead to the destruction of the once great University. And I feel ashamed that the party I support from my heart is part of this destruction.

Dear Vice Chancellor – do free the university of its vices- let your conscious awaken and you be your own master. You be what I knew you about 20 years back. Please work positively without any political biases with only the interests of the University in mind. Lets bring it back to its glory. Everyone makes mistakes. But it is never to late to realize and correct them. Jab Jaage Tab Swara Hai. Being a Soni, I presume you are from a community of jewellers –learn to respect the jewel MSU and stop the damage my friend. I plead stop it in the name of humanity.

Yours truly,
Pantul Kothari
9327245662
Senate Member – Faculty of Management Registered Graduates Constituency

Press Note

2007-05-12T15:44:00.000+05:30

Press note 12th May 2007

We, the staff members of Faculty of Fine Arts, standby Prof.Shivaji Panikkar, who has been wrongly implicated and unceremoniously suspended by the University for sincerely discharging his duty as the In-charge Dean of the Faculty that is primarily to protect the integrity academic sanctity and the over all security of the faculty fraternity, when the University authorities failed to do so.

It should be noted that we are not in position to comment on the art work in dispute as the matter is sub-judice.

As has been repeatedly reiterated, the whole incident has been completely blown out of proportion to serve a political agenda, with the faculty being implicated also by the media fraternity. We hereby appeal to the media fraternity who themselves are the torch bearers of freedom of expression to stand by us and the truth, and empower us to get justice.

We would also like to know on what legal stand the university authorities sealed the department of Art History and Aesthetics, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the incident of contention.

It may be reminded that this reputed department has earned a Grant of Rs.86 Lakhs to the University from Sir. Ratan Tata Trust, thanks to the academic excellence and efforts of the deposed Head of the Department Prof. Shivaji Panikkar.

The Faculty members are taking Mass casual leave today (12-5-07) as protest against the step-fatherly attitude of the university authorities and the undue and uncalled for suspension of Prof. Shivaji Panikkar. In this moment of crisis we all stand united and absolutely emphasize that all decisions taken were on behalf and in agreement with all of us.

All the Staff members of Faculty of Fine Arts.

Gulam Mohammed Sheikh

2007-05-12T15:14:00.000+05:30

Dear friends

You must have known through media reports that Chandra
Mohan, a student from the Department of Graphics at
the Fine Arts College in Baroda has been arrested on
9th of May 2007 for making an allegedly controversial

painting depicting nude figures with some religious
motifs. The arrest followed the storming of the
university premises by a group of outsiders. The work
in question was part of a display in the college

premises for assessment by a team of examiners for a

Master's degree in Fine Arts. Charged with sections
153 and 114 as well as sections 295 A and 295 B, he
has been denied bail and is presently in Central Jail,

Baroda.

In a civilized society any dispute on a controversial

depiction or content of a work of art can be dealt
with through dialogue and consultation with experts in
the field rather than left to self-appointed moral

police employing coersive means. In the present case,

the outsiders taking law into their hands barged into
the university campus without prior permission, did
not consult or inform the Dean of the Faculty before

disrupting the annual examinations in progress. The

reports are that they returned again to abuse the Dean
and threatened him with dire consequences.

Such an instance of assault on a student by outsiders

in the university premises is unprecedented in the

history of the Faculty of Fine Arts and must be
condemned in no uncertain terms. The Fine Arts College
known nationally and internationally for upholding the
highest standards of creative and critical practice

has also earned reputation for its firm commitment to
the freedom of expression. The former authorities of
the university like Smt. Hansa Mehta, the very first
Vice Chancellor in the fifties up to Prof. Bhikhu

Parekh in the eighties have stood by the Faculty and
its ideals. The present assault seems to strike at the
very ideals on which it was built by pioneering
artist-academics and supported by enlightened
university authorities. The present administration of

the university has not initiated any action against
the trespassers or applied for bail for the victimized
student. The students and staff of the Fine Arts
College have organized a dharna and the Acting Dean,

Prof. Shivaji Panikker has planned to undertake a
hunger strike in the College premises against the
assault on the student and callous attitude of the
university authorities. (Latest report is that the

Department of Art History has been sealed and Prof

Panikker has been suspended by the university
authorities). A solidarity demonstration of artists,
intellectuals and cultural workers from all over India

is called on 14th of May at the Fine Arts College
premises beginning 2 pm with an appeal to all

concerned to gather there to lend their support.
(Contact details below*).

As an alumnus and former teacher of the Faculty of

Fine Arts, I fear these developments may imperil the
working of an institution which in many ways has

formed our lives; and is indeed an integral part of
what we are today. I hope all other alumni and

teachers as well as concerned artists and
intellectuals of the country will come forward to
protect it in its moment of crisis when the values it

stands for are threatened.

Gulammohammed Sheikh
11th May, 2007

*Venue: Faculty of Fine Arts (or Fine Arts College),
Pushpabug, University Road, Vadodara (Baroda) 390002
TIME: 2 PM Onwards

Contact emails:
Shivaji Panikker:

shivji.panikkar@gmail.com
Deeptha Achar : <

deeptha.achar@gmail.com>

comment

2007-05-12T15:12:00.000+05:30

Hi Friends,
www.artconcerns.com joins the protest against the Hindu fundamentalists vandalism at the Fine Arts Faculty, Baroda.

www.artconcerns.com brings you the latest happenings from the ground zero, Fine Arts Faculty, Baroda. Please log on to www.artconcerns.com to know the latest news and developments in Baroda. We update our site daily in order to cover the artists' protests happening all over India. We take it up as our moral responsibility.

As you know by now, a final year MFA (Graphics) student, Chandra Mohan was arrested on 9th May 2007 on the false charges levelled against him by a BJP leader Niraj Jain. Chandra Mohan is accused of representing Hindu Gods in indecent forms. Chandra Mohan's work constitute a part of his examination submissions and it was not meant for public viewing. Hindu fundamentalists entered the Fine Arts Faculty premises without prior permission and disrupted the examination procedures. Instead of arresting the hooligans who tried to vandalise the college, the Baroda Police arrested Chandra Mohan on false charges. He is now in Jail. He was denied bail and it is believed that he would be released only on Monday, provided the court finds time to do so! Meanwhile, the students of the faculty put up a show of images from Indian cultural heritage, which showed nudity expressed in aesthetic forms. It was a non-violent method to make the fundamentalists aware that India had a great level of tolerence and aesthetics. However, this show also was brought down by the hooligans with the help of the Pro Vice Chancellor of the M.S.University. The acting dean of the faculty, Shivji Panikkar refused to comply with the authorities and he was suspended from his official duties without prior notice. Various protest meetings have been organised by the artists community all over India.

In order to express solidarity with the protesting students and faculty members, the Delhi Art Community will gather on 14th May (Monday) 2007 at 6 pm at the Lalit Kala Akademy Lawns.

www.artconcerns.com requests all the artists, intellectuals and responisible citizens of Delhi to join the protest meeting on Monday.

Of, by and for freedom of expression

JohnyML
www.artconcerns.com

comment

2007-05-12T15:11:00.000+05:30

Thank you for the same I have some friends in Baroda let me see if they can do something or spread awareness....This is unacceptable independence of expression thru any form of art is a basic right.

--
Thank You,

Mehul Patel

Co-Founder - Indy Chai - India's first Web 2.0 Hyper Aggregated
Portal - http://IndyChai.com

comment

2007-05-12T15:10:00.000+05:30

Thanks for taking the right initiative to fight the facist ... I am
totally disturbed to see the vandalism by safforn goons as well self
appointed moral watch man in our university campus..
who the hell are they to take the law in thier hand and manhandle the
artist.. If a peice of art of an artist disturb the sentiment of so
call hindu cadres they simply dont have any right to enter the fine
arts collage premises and beat the artist.. In which soceity we are
living ?...

Being an alumn of the university I strongly condem the action of
officer bearer of M.S University ... Are they become political slave
of Modi Govt....Is not it the job of authority of academic institution
to save its students from illegial attack.. Why after 48 hrs no bail
effort has been made by university.. Its a shame.. !

I whole heartedly support effort taken by you and other former teacher
to put a strong resistence for this kind of behavior..

shame .!..shame ! ...shame ! ... its high time civil society of
vadodara , artist fraternity and other like minded peeple come forward
and see that real culprit get judicial punishment... I will also urge
you that, on your capacity pls file a PIL in higher court againts
the university administration and governemnt concern.. University
officer bearer can not act like a political agent ...

Punish those safforn goons , punish the authority and finally I pray
that the said artist should get justice..

best of luck buddy..lets start a signature protest campign and present
to central and state government for action..

LONG LIVE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ...LONG LIVE ARTIST FREEDOM

Best regards

B.Bhattacharya ( Bhutu)
(A former student of M.S.U)

Letter to Registrar

2007-05-12T15:04:00.000+05:30

To
The Registrar
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda
Baroda.

Dear Sir,

We the staff members and the students of the Faculty of Fine Arts are of the opinion that in view of the fact that outside elements forced their way into the premises of the Faculty on the 9th of May at about 3.30 pm and caused not only immediate closure of the examination work that was underway but got the police to take the final year student into custody and resorted to a near riot like situation and were despite all this were allowed to go scott-free, is a matter of great concern to us. Unfortunately we are now under pressure to offer apologies for permitting display of the allegedly offensive paintings. We the undersigned are firmly of the view that like any work of art, the intention of the said works were not to hurt anybody’s sentiments but to examine taboos in the light of creative investigation. They were certainly not intended to cause hurt or outrage to any public sentiment whatsoever.

It may also be stated that the said works were part of the final year annual display. The display is part of the annual examination process and an internal academic matter of the faculty over a considerable span of time and not an aberration in the academic procedures of the Faculty. Hence the disruption caused is an attempt not only to disrupt the process of evaluation but designed to undermine the stature and autonomy of an educational institute of international repute. There were attempts on the part of Mr. Niraj Jain and the mob accompanying him to paint the pictures as “anti Gujarat” and to inflame passions so as to cause maximum damage. It may also be noted that these very people were seen to be moving around with impunity, threatening and abusing students and teachers. This is a cruel irony in view of the fact that it is the Faculty of Fine Arts has made substantial contributions toward placing Gujarat and Baroda on the international cultural scene along with making equally substantial contributions in enriching the local environment.

It should be categorically stated that Mr. Niraj Jain did not want to discuss anything peacefully with the Faculty authorities and was, in fact, aggressively contemptuous of them. He came with the intention to cause disruption and breach of peace. This amounts to willful disruption of the examination process and wanton violation of the autonomy and sanctity of the Faculty of Fine Arts.

The action constitutes an assault on the core values of the university or for that matter of any academic institution in a democratic country like India. If situations such as the above are allowed to prevail, it would not only undermine the fundamental freedom provided to us by the constitution but also render it impossible for the faculty and its departments to function meaningfully.

We, therefore, urge upon you to safeguard the integrity of the university by filing an FIR immediately, identifying the perpetrators of whom the principal has already been named as Mr Niraj Jain.

Yours sincerely Copy to the Vice-Chancellor

Press statement

2007-05-12T15:02:00.000+05:30

PRESS STATEMENT

On the 9th of May 2007, Wednesday, outside elements forced their way into the premises of the Faculty of Fine Arts at 3.30pm and caused not only immediate closure of the examination work that was underway but got the police to take the MVA final year student Chandra Mohan into custody. They resorted to abusive language, threat of bodily harm and despite all this were allowed to go scott-free. It is a matter of great concern to us. Unfortunately we are now under pressure to offer apologies for permitting display of the allegedly offensive paintings. We the undersigned are firmly of the view that whether we like it or not an artist has the right to express unconventional views in a work of art. The intention of the said works were not to hurt anybody’s sentiments but to examine taboos in the light of creative investigation. They were certainly not intended to cause hurt or outrage to any public sentiment whatsoever. Besides, they were not part of a public exhibition. If anyone felt that any work ‘offends’ their sensibility it could have been brought to the notice of the authorities without resorting to abusive, indiscriminate and uncalled for behavior. In the unfortunate circumstances if any published image, seen out of the context, has caused hurt to anybody it is regretted.

It is pertinent to state that the said works were part of the final year annual display. The display is part of the annual examination process and an internal academic matter of the faculty over many years and not an aberration in the academic procedures of the Faculty. Hence the disruption caused is an attempt not only to disrupt the process of evaluation but designed to undermine the stature and autonomy of an educational institute of international repute. There were attempts on the part of Mr. Niraj Jain and the mob accompanying him to paint the pictures as “anti Gujarat” and to inflame passions so as to cause maximum damage. It may also be noted that these very people were seen to be moving around with impunity, threatening and abusing students and teachers. This is a cruel irony in view of the fact that it is the Faculty of Fine Arts that has made substantial contributions toward placing Gujarat and Baroda on the international cultural scene along with making equally substantial contributions in enriching the local environment.

It should be categorically stated that Mr. Niraj Jain did not want to discuss anything peacefully with the Faculty authorities and was, in fact, aggressively contemptuous of them. He came with the intention to cause disruption and breach of peace. This amounts to willful disruption of the examination process and wanton violation of the autonomy and sanctity of the Faculty of Fine Arts.

The action constitutes an assault on the core values of the University or for that matter of any academic institution in a democratic country like India. If situations such as the above are allowed to prevail, it would not only undermine the fundamental freedom provided to us by the Constitution but also render it impossible for the faculty and its departments to function independently and meaningfully.

Letter to National Human Rights’ Commission

2007-05-12T14:57:00.000+05:30

11th May, 2007
To
The Chairman
National Human Rights’ Commission
New Delhi

Sir,
We are hereby soliciting your immediate attention to a grave crisis and danger that we the faculty and students of the Faculty of Fine Arts, The M.S. University of Baroda, Baroda are faced with.

On 9th May, 2007, while the Faculty was in the final stages of its annual examination, a VHP/BJP leader, Mr. Niraj Jain, descended on the Faculty and pounced upon certain paintings that were on display as part of the examination work declaring them to be an insult to religion. We may underline the fact that the “display” of the works by the students was for the purpose of evaluation by the external jury and not for public exhibition and the entry to it was restricted. Mr. Niraj Jain and the mob came accompanied by the police and the local media. While a student, S. Chandramohan, whose work it was, and a friend of his (who had come from Andhra Pradesh), were whisked away and put behind bars, Mr. Niraj Jain and his cohorts held the faculty and students to ransom for over 5 hours subjecting them to insults and humiliations in the presence of a contingent of policemen including officers. The In-charge Dean of the Faculty, Prof. Shivaji Panikkar, received the worst of these. The violent incident disrupted the examination process and brutally violated the autonomy of the University. The police had entered the University campus without seeking the Vice-Chancellor’s permission, and allowed a mob of known rabble rousers to take over. Although the friend of Chandramohan was released the same day, Chandra Mohan himself, arrested by the police without an arrest warrant, continues to remain behind bars for the third day. This is shocking and unprecedented in the history of the university.

Even more shocking has been the response of the University authorities. Far from standing up to the assault on the autonomy and jurisdiction of the University they have made common cause with the perpetrators of the assault. Instead of taking legal action against the mob and its leader, and file a FIR against them for disrupting examinations and infringing upon the autonomy of the University, they have put pressures on the faculty and the In-charge Dean, Prof Panikkar, to tender an apology for hurting public opinion. With the Faculty having refused to comply with this unprincipled diktat, the University has today in the late afternoon sealed the Office of the Department of History to which Prof. Panikkar belongs and in the late evening issued an order suspending him from the University. In tandem with this outrageous act, Mr. Niraj Jain has filed an application with the police seeking the inclusion of Prof. Panikkar as a co-accused in the FIR against Chandramohan. Both the students and the Faculty are now being threatened with dire consequences. There is now an acute danger to their safety and a drastic curtailment of their fundamental rights as citizens of a democratic country. Contrary to this an application filed by students of the Faculty against the offence committed by Mr. Niraj Jain to the police asking the latter to file an FIR against Mr. Jain for criminal trespass, intimidation, and unlawful disruption of the examination procedure of a reputed University has been ignored by the police. The result is that we have been left to the mercy of the mob. Day after day, hour after hour, we are being subjected to verbal attacks and threats of vengeance and destruction conveyed through the media. Given the stark and ignominious complicity of the University authorities, the Vice-Chancellor and the Pro-Vice Chancellor with the police and goons in this sordid drama we are left with no alternative but to appeal to you for intervention for the protection of our lives and security. We want you to intercede with the University administration, the Chancellor of the University and the Governor of Gujarat who is the Visitor to the University to ensure the same. Over and above this the examination being of the final year Masters has been left incomplete and seriously jeopardizes the future of the students.

Yours sincerely
Faculty and students, Faculty of Fine Arts
The M.S. University of Baroda