SCHOOL OF LAW

EVENT REPORT

Name of the Event

Panel Discussion on Need for Sustaining the values of our Freedom Fighters in Today’s
India

Date of the Event

August 11, 2022

Venue of the Event

Seminar Hall, Block B, CHRIST University Delhi NCR

Head of Department

Dr. Fincy Pallissery

Event Coordinators

Prof. Varun Srivastava and Prof. Vijeta Verma

1
2
 INDEX
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………...4
Opening of the Event…………………………………………………………………………6
Address by the Campus Director……………………………………………………………..7
Welcome of Eminent Guest…………………………………………………………………..9
Summary of Discussion………………………………………………………………………12
Discussion on Liberty and Freedom of Speech and Expression……………………...13
Discussion on Role of Religion………………………………………………………14
Discussion on Whether Worshipping is Justified…………………………………….15
Discussion on What kind of Education is being given to Children…………………..16
Discussion on Role of Courts………………………………………………………....17
Discussion on People’s Right to Information………………………………………...18
Concluding Statement by Prof. Varun………………………………………………………..19
Prof. Sreenath Namboodiri’s Opinion………………………………………………………..20
Question and Answer Session………………………………………………………………..20
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………22
Vote of Thanks……………………………………………………………………………….23
Christ Anthem and Conclusion of Event……………………………………………………..23

3
INTRODUCTION

In continuation of the celebration of the 75th year of Indian Independence the Constitutional
Law Studies Committee of The School of Law, Christ (Deemed to be University), Delhi NCR
organized a panel discussion on the topic “NEED FOR SUSTAINING THE VALUES OF A
FREEDOM FIGHT FIGHTERS IN TODAY'S INDIA” on 11th of August from 10:30 AM at
Seminar Hall, Block B of the Christ University, Delhi NCR Campus.

Prof. Varun, Prof. Rahul, Prof. Albert, and Prof. Philip (Left to Right)

The panel discussion was presided over by esteemed guests and experts like Prof. Rahul
Shrivastava, Prof. Albert Abraham, and Prof. Philip Varghese.

The discussion was related to constitutional values and societal values for which our forefathers
sacrificed their life. This discussion helped the students to get clarity about the values and

4
principles of our freedom fighters. It also motivated the students to sustain the hard-earned
freedom of the citizens of our country.

Prof. Rahul, Fr. Sunny, Prof. Philip, and Prof. Albert (Left to Right)

5
 +

Students attending the panel discussion

OPENING OF THE EVENT

The event started with a quote from Mother Teresa, “God speaks in the silence of the heart, the
beginning of the prayer shall be from the heart because that purity is unmatchable,” which was
followed by a minute of silent prayer. Next, the guiding light of the university Father Sunny
Joseph was called on to receive a sapling as a token of welcome from Prof. Varun Srivastava
and to inspire the audience with his enlightening words.

6
 Fr. Sunny receiving a sapling from Prof. Varun

ADDRESS BY CAMPUS DIRECTOR

Respected Father Sunny Joseph addressed and welcomed the faculty members of the Law
School, panel members of this panel discussion, and his dear christites. He appreciated the fact
that the future of the nation, the students were here to discuss what would sustain the value for
which the freedom fighters bequeath to us. Father reflected on how the freedom fighters
forwent their comfort, their love, and their life for the nation. He motivated the law students
and called upon them to uphold the law. Father ended his speech by motivating us to be leaders
who uphold the values. The emcee thanked the father for his inspiring words.

7
Fr. Sunny addressing the gathering

8
WELCOME OF EMINENT GUESTS

Eminent resource persons for the panel discussion were formally invited to the dais and
received a token of gratitude from Prof. Varun Srivastava. The first panelist was Prof. Philip
Varghese, who is the assistant professor of political science at Christ (Deemed to be University)
Delhi NCR. The emcee for the event invited him to receive a sapling from Prof. Varun as a
token of gratitude.

Prof. Philip receiving a token of gratitude from Prof. Varun

9
The second panelist was Prof. Albert Abraham, communication specialist, media educator,
policy analyst, and assistant professor at Christ (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR. She
requested Prof. Varun to give the sapling as a token of gratitude to Prof. Albert.

Prof. Varun giving a token of gratitude to Prof. Albert

10
Finally, Prof. Rahul Srivastava, who was the third panelist was introduced. Prof. Rahul is the
Assistant Professor of law at Christ (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR. Prof. Varun gave
the sapling and welcomed him.

Prof. Rahul receiving a token of gratitude from Prof. Varun

11
The panelists were requested to have a seat on the stage.

Next, the emcee called upon the faculty convenor and the backbone of the Constitutional Law
Studies Committee, Prof. Varun Shrivastava to address the gathering and take forward the
panel discussion.

Prof. Varun with the panelists

SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION

Prof Varun greeted a warm good morning and welcomed the father and the esteemed panel
members and the students of Christ (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR. Prof. Varun quoted

12
the revolutionary freedom fighter Bhagat Singh, “If the death has to hear then the sound has to
be very loud.”

Prof. Varun commencing the panel discussion

Discussion on Liberty and Freedom of Speech and Expression

Prof. Varun directed a question toward Prof. Rahul to what extent the citizens should have
liberty and freedom of speech and expression to protest against the government. He also
showed his concern about the current situation in India where a dissenter like a journalist and
a stand-up comedian is jailed. Prof. Rahul responded to the question by outlining the
importance of dissent in a democracy. He pointed out that there is nothing like a foolish
question. He talked about how protesters at Shaheen Bagh and Farmers Protest were called
terrorists, traitors, and anti-nationals. He showed his disapproval of such jargon however he
approved if people chose to disagree with such protests due to their political thought or

13
ideology. Next Prof. Philip first thanked HOD Fincy ma’am and co-ordinators for having the
panel discussion and inviting him to be a part of it. He expressed his views on the question by
first enlightening the audience on what “freedom” is. He put forward that our freedom is hard
earned and the challenges we are facing today are nothing when compared to the colonial rule
in India. Next Prof. Abraham stated that he has a very idealistic view of the right to dissent. He
says that dissent is unwanted everywhere and this culture should change. He wants that there
should be a formal system or structure in our political system. This would prevent chaos and
violence which is a cause of delegitimization of dissent. He also showed his concern about the
intolerance of the current dispensation, especially at the Center.

Discussion on Role of Religion

Next Prof. Varun quoted the speech of Father Jerome who was one of the priests and a member
of the constituent assembly which framed the constitution of Ireland. Prof Varun asked a very
important question about what role religion plays in establishing a just and fair society.

Prof. Rahul Shrivastava responded that religion plays an important role in bringing people
together and more importantly close to God. He emphasized the point that service, love for
fellow beings, and many other things are brought about by religion. However, he was
concerned about the growing fanaticism around the globe. He also pointed out that conflicts
between religious and agnostic people are bound to happen in a society. He wants a society
where there is space for both deeply religious people and completely agnostic people.

Next Prof. Albert gave his views on this point. He stated that the problem lies in how we
understand religion. He says that if religion is taken in terms of identity, then it is a problem.
Religion should be considered as a social institution that can help individuals to become better
citizens. He also said that he has no problem with religious people actively taking part in
politics and taking constitutional positions or offices.

14
Next Prof. Philips agreed with Prof. Albert and said that pitching religion and politics against
each other is not a good way to go. He also pointed out that historically India has always been
one of the tolerant societies with principles like “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”.

Prof. Rahul also made a point that if we look at the major legal system of the world, we will
find that they are organized on either uniform linguistic ground or uniform religious ground.
However, India has this very unique opportunity that we have so many religions here. We have
so many languages here and our forefathers of the constitution have organized us in a way that
provided us with visions and values within the constitution that we must carve out space for
everyone.

Discussion on whether worshipping is justified

Prof. Varun moved on to his next question. He quoted Prof. Ambedkar “There is nothing wrong
in being grateful to a great man who has rendered lifelong services to the country, but there are
limits to gratefulness.” He asked if hero worshiping is justified.

Prof. Philip responded to this question and said that this is not new. He said that Mahatma
Gandhi has a large following as a leader and nothing is to be compared. He talked about Raja
Ram Mohan Roy. He said that popularity associated with a strong leader is a reality in the
Indian context. He also mentioned that what matters is the values and vision of the leader and
the closeness of these values to the constitution. He also cautioned us that where there is a
concentration of power, we should take it a bit seriously as freedom is hard-earned.

Prof. Albert talked about an aura that surrounds these popular leaders. He enlightened us with
his experiences with Sam Pitroda and Arvind Kejriwal. However, he said that our reason and
faculty of reasoning should not be subordinated to the popularity or aura of these leaders.

Prof. Rahul enlightened us with his views. He said that we have to be careful while choosing a
leader. He said we should think of what is the charismatic quality we are looking for. He said

15
that the charismatic quality is not about the personal aura but of the principles and the modern
freshness of thought that they bring to society. He said it is the moral conviction for doing good
is the real charisma.

Discussion on what kind of education is being given to children

Next Prof. Varun moved to a very important question by first quoting Vijyalaxmi Pandit,
“Education was not merely a means for earning a living or an instrument for the acquisition of
wealth. It was an initiation into the life of the spirit, a training of the human soul in pursuit of
truth and the practice of virtue.” He asked if we were educating our children just to acquire
wealth, to get placed at higher places to become wealthy, accomplished people. Or are we
trying to make them hold some person or a citizen who can be responsible for upholding
what we call the so-called idea of India?

Prof. Philip said that somewhere the idea of knowledge is what we are forgetting. He said
students these days talk about the package and placement. He said it is not the fault of the
student but the growing competition.

Prof. Albert responded to the question. He said that he does not have any specific answer to
that question. He expressed his opinion that an educated person who holds degrees and
qualifications makes him a person who takes the right political decisions because even the so-
called political decision is also subjected to a lot of interpretations.

Next Prof. Rahul made an enlightening point. He said education may have little connection
with the person’s criminal or immoral act. He says that there is a paradigm shift in the thinking
of criminology when the white-collar crime is done and Sutherland's theory of differential
association, where Sutherland points out that each of the associations, which we aspire in the
world to get good school education, to get a good university education, then to get an excellent
work culture. All these associations are used by a person to commit crimes. The person using
his university friends, using his colleagues in the ministry, so all these associations he's using

16
to commit white-collar crimes. So here we are seeing a privileged person, a person with all
kinds of comfort, the best of education committing a crime.

Discussion on the role of courts

The discussion was further carried out by Professor Varun quoting Sarojini Naidu, “When there
is oppression, the only self-respecting thing is to rise and say, this shall cease today because
my right is justice.” The next question asked by Prof. Varun was what roles do courts play?
He asked about it in the context of the propaganda, hate speeches, and how is being tolerated
in our country. He asked how much the threshold pushed for tolerating or insulting
constitutional values and the role of courts to bring back the strict implementation of
constitutional values.

In Prof. Rahul’s opinion, courts have been very moderate when it comes to media and freedom
of speech and expression. He also said courts have not attacked media until and unless they
included intention in their criticism. He said, courts have been cautious of the freedom of
speech and expression after what we experienced in emergency and they generally allow media
to go how they are going. According to him, self-regulation is the best regulation for media.

Prof. Albert started by saying the important role played by the press during the freedom
struggle and the increased influence of media post-independence. He further said that now
media is simply used as an instrument and particularly as government propaganda. He talked
about a book written by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman on Manufacturing Consent. He
said media houses are now reluctant to speak against the government due to some reasons
which were explained by him. He further said that post-2014 governments are not changing
which is very unfortunate and will harm the spirit of democracy.

Prof. Philip talked about the idea of justice itself. He explained the platonic area of justice. He
mentioned that justice at the end of the day is individual at large. He further added that there

17
are different associations, different agencies, and different organizations in our democratic
space where justice can be delivered.

Discussion on Peoples’ Right to Information

This was the last question put forward by Prof. Varun for this event. He started by quoting
Netaji Subash Chandra Bose, “The secret of political bargaining is to look more strong than
what you really are.” He asked, How important is the people’s right to know what the
government is doing? What the representatives of the people are doing? He also mentioned
the point that the Prime Minister in his nine years has never faced the press, he never held a
press conference, and hence what is people’s bargaining power if they are not allowed to
question those who are in power?

Prof. Rahul started by saying that nowadays there is a worldwide reluctance towards press
conferences. He said that asking direct questions to the people in power is very important. He
further said that courts have not taken a position and have remained silent on the role of
questioning in democracy.

Prof. Albert stated that the reluctance of the concerned person or the government or prime
minister is that maybe they don’t prefer to be held responsible or accountable to the people. He
also said that unfortunately, people are also not aware of this issue. He further added that there
should be some efforts to make people aware of this issue.

Prof. Philip said that many of the concerns are because of centralization and concertation of
powers. He gave the example of GST. He talked about the 3 F’s i.e., Fund, Functions, and
Functionaries, and further said that if these three F’s can be decentralized into the grassroots
level institutions, he thinks that it is one of the major roles in strengthening the democracy. He
also gave a few observations that what can be reasons that the prime minister is not holding
press conferences.

18
 Prof. Varun concluding the session

CONCLUDING STATEMENTS BY PROF. VARUN

First of all, he thanked Prof. Philip, Prof. Albert, and Prof. Rahul for joining him in the panel
discussion and giving some interesting ideas and arguments in the discussion. He said that if
he is to club all the arguments together, he will start that decentralizing the things that will be
the heart of the discussion and the problems discussed. He said that there is a collective
responsibility. He further added that he traded questions like hero-worshipping, strengthening
of democracy, and the role of courts together to get more clarity on these issues.

He commenced the question-and-answer session further.

19
PROF. SREENATH NAMBOODIRI’S OPINION

Prof. Sreenath is an Assistant Professor at Christ (Deemed to be University). He was actively

listened to the discussion happening and after the competition of the panel discussion, he
expressed his opinions on the topics discussed. He started by saying that the main theme of the
discussion revolved around the idea of expression. He talked about Art. 19(1) and the
reasonable restrictions mentioned in Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India. According to
him, the confusion and distrust are there in the constitution itself. He also mentioned that
religion has always been there in context. He further added that religion has contributed to the
stability of the political system. He said as long as God exists, religion will always be there in
political scenarios.

QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

Prof. Varun allotted 15 minutes for the Q/A session and asked students to ask the panelists if
they have something that they want their opinion on. Questions were taken collectively by him.

The first question was what kind of protest is viable and whether should there be any limit on
freedom of speech. The second question was are people who dissent without knowing what
they are dissenting for justified? He carried on by asking how to recognize who has the right
to dissent and who does not have that right. The next question was about the role of the Supreme
Court in dealing with media. The student said that misinformation is being spread actively by
prime-time shows so is it a violation of the right to be informed is this hesitance of the Supreme
Court justified or is it the case of selective judicial activism and an ignorant forum? The last
question for the day was about the important role that the media is playing in today’s life.

The panelists one by one dealt with all the questions.

Prof. Philip started by rebutting Prof. Sreenath’s argument by saying that the constitutional
framers had the belief in the Indian population. He talked about B.R. Ambedkar and his

20
initiatives and also about Universal Adult Franchise. About the limits of freedom, he said
political ideologies play an important role and he said naming the people who protest
andolanjeevis, and anti-nationals are wrong. He said people have been protesting when there
is something wrong but suddenly from 2014, they have become andolanjeevis. He said there is
a bigger picture to this.

Prof. Albert had two perspectives. First, he said every citizen has the right to protest and when
anti-people or anti-constitutional policies are framed or implemented then the people have the
right to protest. According to him, as far as we don’t violate reasonable restrictions, we have
the right to protest. He further added that media is not free and there are a lot of underpinnings
that we need to understand in a very comprehensive way.

Prof. Rahul started with some comments on Prof. Sreenath’s views. He said that Constituent
Assembly not having faith in people is not a very correct statement to say. He said that we
decided to have a strong union irrespective of American federalism. He focused on the reason
why people protest and understanding why people are saying what they are saying. He further
added that dissent must be addressed properly, as it is also our freedom of expression. And
about the press and Supreme Court, he said that courts normally ignore them unless there is
some men’s rea or intention involved in the things that they say.

21
 Prof. Varun and Panellists addressing students’ questions

CONCLUSION

After an amazing and intellectual discussion, it was formally time to conclude the event. Prof.
Varun gave some concluding statements where he talked about when courts can take
cognizance of matters related to media and how a fine balance is maintained. He also talked
about the reasonable restrictions given in Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. He made a very

22
The strong point when he said that the Constitution is one act you pick up that has the minimum
number of lines and a maximum number of interpretations. He explained it by giving examples
of Article21. He also talked about different languages, ethnicity, religion, and cast culture
prevalent in India. He said we had differences of opinion but at the same time, we also wanted
to hold our country together.

He ended with a question asking 75 years later after independence, should we not be more open
and more liberal in our thought process? He concluded the panel discussion and left this
question for everyone to ponder.

VOTE OF THANKS

Prof. Varun thanked all the panelists and students for attending the panel discussion with such
enthusiasm. The emcee for the event acknowledged the efforts made by each and everyone to
make this panel discussion a great success. She expressed sincere gratitude to the Faculty
Convenors, Dr. Varun Srivastava and Dr. Vijeta, and all the committee members who worked
hard and put in a lot of effort in successfully conducting the event.

CHRIST ANTHEM AND CONCLUSION OF EVENT

Finally, the panel discussion was concluded by the signing of the Christ Anthem by everyone
present.

Overall, the panel discussion was an immense success which helped the students and teachers
in enriching their experiences and knowledge. With the help of all the faculties and students as
well as the alumni’s participation, and the guidance of Dr. Varun Srivastava, the event was a
success and a wonderful experience for everyone involved.

23