Open Letter condemning the unscientific, discriminatory and homophobic content prescribed as ‘readings’ by a faculty member at National Law University, Jodhpur.

Dr. Saxena,
Hon'ble Vice Chancellor and
Hon'ble Members of the General Council,
National Law University, Jodhpur

The Chairperson,
Bar Council of India,
New Delhi

The Secretary,
Ministry of Law and Justice,
Govt. of India New Delhi

We, the undersigned queer-affirmative social activists, practitioners, concerned citizens and groups are writing to you, deeply dismayed at reports alleging that ‘homophobic course materials’ are being prescribed for students of the National Law University, Jodhpur, as ‘reference material’. This incident has come to our notice by way of a detailed letter dt. 17th April from around 150 NLUJ alumni.

We are given to understand that the Dr. Asha Bhandari, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, and Member, Academic Council who teaches the course 'Sociology-III Law and Society' sent the said objectionable material which students claim to be “unscientific, uncritical, based on outdated notions of homosexuality, perpetuates dangerous stereotypes, and legitimizes prejudice against the LGBTQIA+ community”. A perusal of the prescribed material indeed corroborates all these concerns, rightly expressed by the students.

The material shared, terms homosexuality as a 'disorder' and states that 'few believe that homosexuals are sexually obsessive beasts with filthy mindset and inhumane sexual behaviour.' The material presents homosexuality as ‘unnatural’ and identifies the 'causes' of homosexuality as 'weak masculine identity, sexual abuse, sexual addiction, loss of local moral order'. It portrays homosexual people as a threat to society and suggests 'treatments' to 'heal homosexual attractions and behaviour'.

We have learnt that when some students raised these concerns with the said faculty member, she claimed that the material was sent to expose students to 'different perspectives' and 'encourage debate'. However, this ‘other side’ presented by the faculty member is a poorly researched (mis)representation on the origins of thought and literature on homosexuality. The material was shared via email without any context or critique being provided in the email. As the faculty member has herself stated in media reports, the dominant opinion in our society continues to be homophobic, transphobic and queer-phobic.

In such a context, this only adds to the responsibility of the teacher to ensure that materials which provide an outdated and outright discriminatory narrative on the subject, are shared with an explanation and context. Not doing so is irresponsible, perpetuates and legitimises prejudice and stigma against the LGBTQIA+ community. The damage of such acts is compounded by the position of trust and power which a teacher occupies by virtue of their position. That such an incident has taken place at one of the prestigious national law schools, after not one but at least three landmark judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in NALSA versus Union of India (15th April 2014), K Puttaswamy v Union of India (24th Aug, 2017) and Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (6th Sep, 2018) on the subject, disturbs us a great deal.

We feel it is important to openly stand in solidarity with the alumni and students who have raised legitimate concerns and condemn the actions of the faculty member in sharing such discriminatory, offensive and outdated material under the garb of ‘encouraging debate’, without providing context or clarifying the antiquated nature of the thoughts presented in the readings. We are further told that the said faculty member undertook to send updated material on the subject but failed to provide sociological material that is non-stigmatising. Instead, the teacher passed on the responsibility of finding appropriate material to the students who had called her out.

This not only reflects an attitude of reprisal but also raises questions on the faculty members’ knowledge, understanding and commitment to teaching the subject. That a faculty member of a national law university treats issues of gender and sexuality with such a cavalier and lackadaisical attitude, using her authority to punish students demanding rigour and fairness in academics, is plain unacceptable and unprofessional. It is indeed deplorable that despite the leaps that sociology and law have made in understandings on homosexuality, stigma and homophobia permeate into the pedagogy in prestigious institutions like the National Law University, Jodhpur.

We agree that it is important to teach the history of homosexuality from various approaches. However, the same cannot be devoid of critical thought, affirmation and sensitivity in the selection and sharing of material. An absence of context and employment of regressive and discriminatory content depicts harmful stereotypes against the LGBTQIA community. Handling of the subject without responsibility can have far-reaching impacts on mental health and identity of students who may yet be struggling with their gender and sexual identities.

We are informed that students and alumni of the institution have demanded accountability on the matter from the administration and the administration has begun an investigation into the matter. We urge that the same be conducted in a transparent and time-bound manner, preferably with involvement of external members of the LGBTQIA+ community.  

We also urge that the faculty member be made to forthwith withdraw the problematic course material shared by her with an explanation to the students and an apology to the LGBTQIA+ community.

In addition, we suggest creating a comprehensive anti-discrimination policy with grievance redressal mechanisms for any form of discrimination on campus by either the faculty or the student body. Such policies are already in their final stage of approval at NUJS and NLSIU.

Finally, we offer our support to the University, in furthering academic approaches that are LGBTQIA+ affirming.