The directives on NCERT show the Court as keen to stave off any criticism

The directives on NCERT show the Court as keen to stave off any criticism

The Supreme Court of India’s sense of hurt at references to judicial corruption in a National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbook is in danger of resulting in a serious case of miscarriage of justice. According to the Court, the NCERT’s textbook development team did not have “reasonable, informed knowledge about the Indian judiciary”. The Court went on to direct that persons such as those in the team should not be associated in “any manner with preparation of school curriculum or finalisation of textbooks for the next generation of this country”. This sweeping statement has cast a shadow over the entire exercise of textbook writing. While insisting on independent domain experts such as a senior judge to approve the chapters on judiciary before publication, the Court could have initiated a similar process for other chapters as well, especially for those dealing with history where the misrepresentation of facts is sometimes tinged with bigotry.

In the past, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allied organisations had critiqued Indian textbooks saying that they were Macaulay-an and created “westernised” minds that did not hold India’s past, its traditions, and the Hindu religion as sacred. When the BJP came to power, it sought to redraft the textbooks along these lines. Now, references to Hindu rituals and beliefs are found across textbooks and subjects. For instance, a discussion on solar energy refers to the ritual of “arghyam”, a Vedic salutation to the sun by pouring water. Geography is strictly science, but a geography chapter in a class seven textbook talks about a divine feminine presence pervading the Indian landmass, thereby making it sacred. The Court must apply the same yardsticks it used for the judiciary chapters to history chapters in the textbooks too. Part 1 of the same social science textbook for class eight describes Muslim rulers as uniformly and singularly cruel, despotic and repressive whereas Hindu kingdoms are portrayed as benign and as resisting Muslim rule. Objectivity is given short shrift, leading to genuine fears that the narrative is to instigate bigotry even though the class eight textbook includes a disclaimer that today’s generation is not to be blamed for the ‘sins’ of the past. Textbook writing requires not just subject matter expertise but also skill that would genuinely kindle knowledge and inquiry as well as train minds towards valuing fairness, equality, peace and harmony. The language is important, so is the intent. Any selective targeting of chapters will only reinforce the perception that the judiciary is merely protecting itself. That, ultimately, would undermine any conception of justice.