New Delhi: The recent imposition of an administrative regulation on research presentations at Delhi University (DU) has triggered a deeper crisis of trust, exposing what many faculty and students believe is a systematic attempt to stifle dissent, control scholarship, and reshape the identity of one of India’s top universities.

The recent requirement for prior approval of papers to be presented outside the university is being read by many as a thinly veiled instrument of ideological control.
According to a November 12 notification, DU faculty wishing to present papers at national or international seminars must now submit the full text of the paper two months prior to the event. Alongside, they are required to provide the conference brochure or programme schedule, an invitation letter, and post event, a detailed report of sessions attended and a certificate of presentation. Crucially, the new rules empower a DU-appointed committee not only to evaluate the academic merit of the paper, but also to vet the “credentials of the organising body”.

For many, the new protocol formalises a growing culture of oversight and censorious gatekeeping. To critics, this move is less about academic rigour and more about policing voices and narrowing the space for independent intellectual work.

Speaking to The Wire, psychologist and former assistant professor at DU, Itisha Nagar, described the new rules as “extremely infuriating”.

She asked, “Who are these? What does it mean to check the credentials of an organising body?” – pointing out that an organising body is “a group of intellectuals or an association that has come together to organise a conference.” “What,” she asked, “is there to check? Are there standard guidelines? Credentials? Or is this simply a mechanism for monitoring where faculty go, who they engage with, what ideas they discuss?”

Nagar pointed out that DU itself lacks institutional review boards and ethical-governance structures that global journals routinely demand before accepting research. “Only two or three years ago,” she said, “did a university-level ethics body come into existence at the college level, nothing.” And yet now DU claims authority to scrutinise external bodies. This, she argued, “goes against the ethos of intellectual freedom.”

Also read: Cash Crunch, Research Void and Guest Faculty Surge: The Collapse of Social Sciences in India

Her remarks highlight a deeper anxiety on the campus that rules such as mandatory pre-submission of papers, institutional vetting, and approval thresholds may not simply regulate academic work but may also reshape power relations between faculty and the administration, turning scholarship and conference attendance into conditional privileges.

In the 2025 Academic Freedom Index (AFI), India was ranked 156th out of the 179 countries assessed in the report. The country's score fell from 0.38 in 2022 to 0.16, putting it in the bottom 10-20% bracket. AFI, published by the V-Dem Institute, measures countries on the following factors – freedom to research and teach; freedom of academic exchange and dissemination; institutional autonomy; campus integrity; and freedom of academic and cultural expression.

Another DU professor highlights why it is important to understand the timing of the move. “There is a broader shift in DU’s institutional posture under vice chancellor Yogesh Singh, who has overseen the slow “saffronisation” of campus life,” they said.

In a controversial speech on September 28, Singh declared that “Naxalism today operates not from forests, but from universities and cities,” alleging that professors and students who engage in critical thinking or social-justice research were pushing “urban naxalism”. He urged teachers to “identify” and “remove” those working “against the nation”. The speech was later circulated across DU’s internal lists and social media, and soon after triggered protests by student groups and condemnation from civil-liberties organisations.

To many inside the university, the speech was not an aberration but part of a broader trend – a systematic transformation of DU’s identity – from a historically plural, secular, intellectually vibrant institution into one increasingly aligned with the ideological priorities of the ruling dispensation.

Over the past years, critics say, DU has initiated or supported moves such as setting up a “Centre for Hindu Studies,” introducing hawans and religious ceremonies on campus, painting walls and gates saffron, and promoting courses like “Dharmashastra Studies”. Simultaneously, the university reportedly dropped contentious texts such as the Manusmriti from its syllabus – a decision welcomed by some but critics flagged new proposals that are aimed at reintroducing ideologically loaded courses, or endorsing works aligned with a particular worldview.

Also read: Sweet Dreams of Luring Scholars While Driving Our Own Away

In that context, the new seminar-approval norm appears less like a quality-control measure than a pre-emptive firewall, a formal mechanism that can be used to deny permission, restrict academic exchange or monitor faculty participation in discourse outside the university.

For many long-serving teachers and students, the new rules signal a shift in the campus climate. Spaces that once accommodated dissent, debate, and critical scholarship now feel increasingly regulated. If the university can withhold permission for conferences, track where faculty travel, or ask for full papers months in advance, the space for independent academic work inevitably contracts.

This comes at a moment when the freedom to question and the freedom to critique, long considered essential to university life, are already under strain. The vice-chancellor’s recent speech describing certain forms of academic work as “urban naxalism,” followed by a regulation that centralises control over faculty participation in external events, has led many to read these moves together as part of a broader effort to define acceptable academic behaviour.

Whether these rules will face legal challenge or spark organised resistance is yet to be seen. But what is evident, several faculty members say, is that DU is moving towards a system where participation in scholarly exchange is no longer routine practice but something that requires administrative sanction.

For those who see universities as spaces meant to safeguard inquiry and intellectual autonomy, this policy is less an administrative change than a troubling indication of where DU and the broader academic environment may be heading.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.