Author:
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: September 24, 2002
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/archive_full_story.php?content_id=10008
Murli Manohar Joshi, the ever-controversial
Human Resource Development Minister, finally has reason to feel vindicated.
The education policy drafted under his controversial helmsmanship, which
generated reams of controversy and comment on the issue of revision of
history text-books and the introduction of the study of religion, crossed
a major legal hurdle when a petition alleging ''saffronisation of education''
was dismissed by the Supreme Court. Joshi tells Santwana Bhattacharya that
his motives were always noble; and that all criticism was ''motivated and
mischievous'.
Q.: The Supreme Court's September
12 judgement upholding the National Curriculum Framework for Secondary
Education is a moral victory for you. But could the issue have been approached
and tackled in a different manner?
A.: The best manner was adopted
by us. There were so many levels of consultations on the National Curriculum
Framework with the SCERTs (State Councils for Educational Research and
Training). Experts were invited and there were interactions with teachers.
Three thousand copies of the draft curriculum were circulated. The framework
was circulated in its final shape to chief ministers, to all political
parties and MPs concerned with issues of education. Nobody responded. Not
even the editors of leading newspapers, who later criticised it without
reading it.
Q.: But the criticism was never
taken as a valid response.
A.: Because it was motivated and
mischievous criticism, that was designed to keep the Indian school curriculum
behind time. It was a case of suppressio veri and suggestio falsi.
In the Supreme Court, not a single
word could be shown that was at variance with Parliament's statement on
the National Policy of Education. It was a policy that had been passed
by Parliament. I only implemented it. People started developing stomach
aches because no one before me could implement the policy. The most vitriolic
reaction came from the Leftists as they had to hide their own skeletons.
They feared their own skewed curriculum would be exposed- their history
and social science books which teach how Lenin inspired the Indian freedom
struggle and which ignore Rabindranath Tagore, Subhash Chandra Bose or
Gandhi's contributions.
Q.: If you did seek across the board
consultation, why did you avoid constituting the Central Advisory Board
of Education (CABE)?
A.: The CABE wasn't ever constituted
after 1994. Narasimha Rao did not do it, Inder Kumar Gujral did not do
it. Why blame me? Do you know the structure of CABE? Apart from the state
education ministers, it has posts for 50-60 experts which I would have
had to fill up. Then they would have accused me of filling up CABE with
BJP people. Then, CABE would have been under attack!
The CABE was set up by the British
in 1935 to control the education policy of each and every state. Mahatma
Gandhi was against CABE, the Congress was opposed to it. For the sake of
opposition, they forget their own history.
Q.: Nobody would object to the working
principle of periodic revisions and updating of textbooks. But fundamental
alterations or radical changes make people a little uneasy.
A.: There is no change. I have
only taken the country's education system forward, a step ahead. Many state
governments, in fact, have called me up to say it is one of the finest
syllabi that India has ever produced.
Q.: Hypothetically speaking, if,
in two years time, you're sitting in the opposition and the new ruling
dispensation decides to scrap your curriculum framework, what would you
do?
A.: There should be a review every
five years. If they find any part of the new curriculum obsolete, they
can take it out. But after the Supreme Court judgement, I do not think
anyone can tinker around with the National Curriculum Framework just for
the sake of it. Why should we not teach our own time-tested values when
the world over everyone is talking about value-based education?
Q.: The court has separated the
''philosophy of religion'' from ''religious education''. Do you think everybody
down the line will maintain this fine distinction?
A.: Those who want to keep religion
out of people's lives as the ''opium of the masses'' have not been able
to stop Saraswati Vandana in their state (West Bengal). The study of religions
leads to moral values in a civilised society. I am not teaching theology.
India is a pluralistic society, there is a need to know each other's religion
in order to appreciate and accommodate each other. For this, the philosophy
of religion must be a part of the education framework. It is religion which
provides the concept of right and wrong in a society.
Q.: But the BJP's concept of cultural
nationalism, from the Ayodhya movement onwards, is a reflection of its
majoritarian attitude.
A.: No, that is incorrect. The
party has never projected any majoritarian viewpoint. On the contrary,
the BJP is first and the only party which talks about equal rights to all
religions: sarva dharma sambhav.
Q.: If that was so, how do you explain
Gujarat? It is being said that the years of BJP rule in Gujarat have divided
the communities there like never before.
A.: During the Congress regime,
thousands of Sikhs were killed in Delhi. There is no likeness between Gujarat
and Delhi, but the moot point is violence between communities can happen
under any political dispensation. Christian nations in Europe have fought
with each other, so religion is not always the basis of strife. In this
case, religious alienation of the Muslim community dates back to the pre-
partition days and not just the last 10 years. It was heightened and nurtured
by a society based on the misinterpretation of secularism.
Q.: The Supreme Court's dismissal
of the charge of 'saffronisation' was a victory not just for you and your
ministry, but the entire Vajpayee government. But the BJP does not seem
too keen to capitalise on it.
A.: The message has gone across
to the people. I consider it low-level politics to capitalise on an obvious
victory. Besides, I have received scores of letters, telegrams, telephone
calls from across the world. People have responded positively. A few days
ago, I met Jain muni Swami Vidyananda, he blessed me for introducing value-based
education.
