New Delhi: A recent speech delivered by Delhi University Vice Chancellor professor Yogesh Singh on September 28, later posted on his official YouTube channel – alleging that “Naxalism today operates not from forests, but from universities and cities” has provoked fierce criticism from students, faculty, and civil liberties groups alike.Singh, who delivered the talk on September 28 at a Bharat Manthan event, argued that “Naxalism has moved from the forests to universities,” accusing professors and students of spreading “urban naxalism” through critical thinking, data-based research, and what he called “emotional blackmail” of young minds. The speech was circulated through Delhi University’s internal mailing lists and uploaded on Singh’s YouTube and social media accounts.‘Dangerous attempt to surveil and police classrooms and faculty’In his remarks, Singh called on teachers to “identify” and “remove” those working “against the nation,” and praised controversial films by Vivek Agnihotri as material that could be used in classrooms.He also singled out feminist student collective Pinjra Tod, saying that when he headed the Delhi Technical University, the women who demanded safer campuses and fewer curfews were “arrogant” and “aggressive.” He mocked their plea for freedom of movement as “a utopia that shouldn’t exist.”Singh’s remarks immediately drew backlash from student groups including All India Students’ Association (AISA) which protested on campus, calling the speech an attack on student rights and gender equality. Faculty members described it as an “invitation to police dissent” and a “direct assault on the university’s intellectual autonomy.”The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) issued a detailed statement on October 9 calling Singh’s views “regressive, defamatory, and at odds with constitutional values.” PUCL said his call to “identify” so-called “urban naxals” on campus was “a dangerous attempt to surveil and police classrooms and faculty,” warning that such language promotes a “culture of McCarthyism.”“The Vice Chancellor is promoting a homogenous discourse in which dissenting voices have no place in the name of nationalism,” PUCL said, adding that the rhetoric mirrored the “anti-intellectual mindset” fostered by propagandist narratives.PUCL also pointed out that Singh named several scholars and activists facing charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), including DU professors Hany Babu, Shoma Sen, and Anand Teltumbde, and student activists Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal, without noting that courts have questioned the prosecution’s evidence in their cases.“He derides faculty who teach students to think critically about society and the pursuit of truth,” the group said, calling for him to “rescind his views forthwith.”A link that can be made from Singh’s framing of dissent within an “enemy” template closely aligns with Home Minister Amit Shah’s recurring articulation of “internal threats” to the nation – whether framed as infiltrators, “tukde tukde gang,” or “urban naxals.”Prime Minister Narendra Modi too has talked of ‘Gun-Toting Or Pen-Wielding’ naxalism in his speeches. Shah has repeatedly linked dissent to disorder. At a 2019 rally, he called “urban naxals” people who “live in air-conditioned rooms and spread misinformation,” insisting that “they must be identified.” The DU speech essentially localises this mandate within the university, turning the classroom into an ideological frontier.The “urban naxal” construct was coined by filmmaker and BJP supporter Vivek Agnihotri and popularised after his 2018 book and subsequent film series. It has evolved into a political shorthand for dissenters who challenge state narratives. In a 2020 Right to Information (RTI) response, the Union Home Ministry stated that it had no information on who “urban naxals” are or where they operate.Despite this, the term has been widely used by senior BJP leaders, to label critics of the government. For instance, during a December 2019 rally in Jharkhand, PM Modi blamed “urban naxals” for organising protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). Similarly, in November 2019, Shah called for “effective and decisive action” against “urban naxals” and terrorists operating in Jammu and Kashmir.This logic now appears to have trickled down into the academic space. The V-C’s invocation of “urban naxals”, a category popularised by Agnihotri and amplified by right-wing discourse, functions as an epistemological tool: it redraws the boundaries of knowledge itself.Equally troubling was Singh’s dismissal of Pinjra Tod, a movement founded by women students to demand autonomy within hostel rules that restrict female mobility. His remarks describing their activism as “aggressive” and “disrespectful” echo what PUCL called a “benevolent patriarchy” that conflates protection with control.For many, the speech marks not an isolated event but part of a pattern – where the epistemology of nationalism is being re-engineered to absorb universities into the state’s ideological apparatus.Slow Hinduisation of campus life in DUOver the past few years, Delhi University has seen a series of moves that many teachers and students say reflect the slow Hinduisation of campus life.In January 2023, the administration formed a 17-member committee to explore setting up a Centre for Hindu Studies to “study the history of Hindus.” Around the same time, several colleges began hosting hawans and bhandaras within campus spaces, while walls and gates were painted saffron as part of “cultural beautification” drives.More recently, the university dropped Manusmriti from both undergraduate and postgraduate syllabi after protests from faculty, even as new proposals to introduce texts like Shukraniti and “Dharmashastra Studies” emerged. These developments, critics say, mark a shift from DU’s earlier secular ethos to one increasingly shaped by the symbols and priorities of the ruling dispensation – a context in which the Vice Chancellor’s “urban naxal” remarks appear less like an isolated statement and more like part of a continuing ideological project.Since assuming the role of Vice Chancellor at Delhi University in October 2021, Singh has implemented several policies and made public statements that have sparked significant controversy within the academic community. Apart from the recent speech, in June 2025, Singh directed the removal of the Manusmriti from the university’s Sanskrit department curriculum.This decision followed its inclusion in a new course titled Dharamshastra Studies, which was met with criticism due to the text’s controversial content. Singh emphasised that the university would not teach the Manusmriti “in any form,” leading to the deletion of the course from the curriculum.In January 2025, Singh endorsed the book Modi vs Khan Market Gang, authored by Ashok Srivastava, which criticises elite circles opposed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This endorsement led to backlash from faculty members who questioned the appropriateness of the university’s leadership promoting a politically charged publication.Additionally, in May, a move that raised concerns about institutional neutrality, Shaheed Bhagat Singh College issued a notice encouraging students and staff to follow and retweet posts from Singh’s official social media accounts that praised the Indian government’s military actions. The directive was part of the UGC’s “Nation First” campaign but was criticised for compelling institutional endorsement of individual opinions.Singh’s tenure has also been marked by administrative decisions that have drawn scrutiny. In September 2025, he confirmed the suspension of Ramanujan College’s principal following a harassment complaint. While the principal denied the allegations, Singh’s involvement in the decision highlighted the university’s handling of internal disputes.These actions have sparked debates about the balance between administrative authority and academic freedom at Delhi University. Critics argue that Singh’s decisions reflect a broader trend of politicisation in educational institutions, while supporters contend that they are necessary steps to uphold discipline and national integrity.