John J. Kennedy | The Slow Death Of The University In India; As Academic Freedom Is Lacking
In fact, according to the data, more than 50 countries have seen a decline in the past decade, while only nine have improved. India’s story sits squarely within this troubling pattern
There is something deeply disturbing about the latest Academic Freedom Index (AFI) 2026 update. Prepared by researchers at the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU) and the V-Dem Institute, it clearly points to a slow, steady erosion of academic freedom at universities and other institutions across the world. In fact, according to the data, more than 50 countries have seen a decline in the past decade, while only nine have improved. India’s story sits squarely within this troubling pattern.
What makes it particularly worrying is not the scale of the decline but its nature. Unlike the sharp, visible setbacks seen in some countries, India’s academic freedom has been slipping quietly, almost imperceptibly, since around 2013. There have been no singular moments of rupture. Instead, there has been a gradual accumulation of pressures, each small enough to be explained away, but together powerful enough to reshape the system. A crisis that unfolds slowly rarely feels like a crisis at all.
The AFI data makes one point with striking clarity: academic freedom is inseparable from institutional autonomy. The correlation between the two stands at an astonishing 0.91, about as strong as it gets in social science research. Where universities retain control over internal decisions such as appointments, funding priorities, and curriculum, scholars can think, teach, and research freely. Where that autonomy gets weaker, freedom follows. This is where India’s trajectory becomes deeply concerning. The country is now in the bottom 10-20 per cent globally in terms of academic freedom. That is not a marginal slip; it is a structural shift. And it aligns with the data: a consistent, year-on-year decline in institutional autonomy over more than a decade.
What does this decline look like in practice? It rarely comes in the form of outright bans or dramatic crackdowns. Instead, it operates through subtler mechanisms: leadership appointments that signal ideological preference, funding decisions that reward conformity, and administrative controls that shape what can be researched or taught. As the AFI report notes, governments do not always need to repress directly; they can exert influence indirectly, through the architecture of the institutions themselves.
Over time, this changes the university’s character. Scholars begin to anticipate boundaries even when they are not explicitly stated. Departments avoid contentious topics. Research questions become safer. Classrooms grow quieter. The most effective form of control, after all, is not censorship but self-censorship.
To understand why this is happening, it is important to look beyond policy and into the broader ecosystem. Higher education in India remains deeply entangled with governmental structures through funding, regulation, and appointments. This creates opportunities for influence that go far beyond formal policy. When institutional autonomy is not robustly protected, these levers can be used to shape academic priorities.
But the responsibility does not end there. University administrations often become complicit, sometimes out of necessity, sometimes out of convenience. Faced with competing pressures, many choose compliance over resistance. Faculty members, too, are part of this story. When scholars withdraw from difficult questions, avoid public engagement, or internalise the limits imposed upon them, the space for freedom shrinks further. And then there is society. When public discourse becomes polarised, when dissent is equated with disloyalty, academic spaces are inevitably affected.
This is why India’s situation cannot be dismissed as routine institutional friction. The AFI report groups India with “autocratising” contexts, where a combination of political, administrative and social pressures is reshaping academic freedom. What makes the Indian case distinctive is the gradual nature of this transformation. Unlike sudden crackdowns, slow declines are easier to normalise. They do not provoke outrage or dominate headlines. Instead, they seep into the system, becoming part of how things are done, and that is what makes them so difficult to reverse.
The implications reach far beyond universities. When academic freedom weakens, education narrows, research grows cautious, and public debate suffers. Universities cultivate critical thinking, which is the ability to question and imagine alternatives, and when that capacity is diminished, society as a whole loses. There is also a deeper contradiction here. India aspires to be a global knowledge leader, yet such ambitions are impossible where academic freedom is constrained. A country in the bottom 20 per cent globally cannot realistically lead the world in knowledge creation.
So, what can be done? The starting point must be institutional. Universities need to strengthen their internal governance, ensuring that decisions around hiring, promotions and research are transparent and insulated from external pressures. Autonomy is not an abstract ideal; it is built through everyday practices that reinforce independence. University leaders have a particularly critical role. Vice-chancellors and administrators are not merely managers; they are custodians of academic integrity. Their responsibility is to safeguard the institution’s core values, even when doing so is difficult. This means resisting undue interference and ensuring that academic decisions remain in academic hands. Faculty members, too, must resist the quiet pull of self-censorship. The health of a university depends on its scholars’ willingness to ask difficult questions and to pursue uncomfortable truths. Silence may feel safe in the short term, but it comes at a long-term cost. Finally, there is a role for civil society and the broader public.
Academic freedom cannot survive in isolation. It requires a culture that values inquiry, tolerates dissent, and recognises the importance of independent thought.
The AFI 2026 report is a warning. Indian universities are not collapsing. Yes, they continue to teach and produce research. But that is precisely the danger. Academic freedom is being diminished so quietly that its loss risks becoming normal. And when that happens, the very idea of the university begins to change.
The writer is retired professor and former dean of the School of Arts and Humanities at Christ University in Bengaluru