PaRCha - JNU - AISA material - 2010 ID-25350
.
.
A Call for Holding Elections of Students Representatives .
to JNUs Statutory Bodies in the Current Semester .
The Value Of JNUs Elections .
Elections in JNU were never a token means of choosing representatives. Instead, they were marked by dialogue, discussion and heated debate. Every year, in the run-up to the elections, the outgoing JNUSU would conduct General Body Meetings where students aired their views and elected an Election Committee. In October, when the term of the union would expire, the JNUSU would step down and the next elections would begin. The entire election process --- from the school-level debates to the casting of votes --- was conducted by an Election Committee chosen from among the students themselves. Faculty members and the administration had absolutely no role to play. Financial transparency was strictly ensured and even the threat of violence was dealt with by disenfranchisement. Once the elections began, there was little else to talk about. And for nearly two weeks, the campus was transformed. .
For over two years now, this campus has been without elections. Two batches of JNU students have come and gone without seeing elections, and a third such batch enters campus this year. .
.
The Agenda Of The Lyngdoh Recommendations .
The facts surrounding the matter are by now well known: of how, in October 2008, as elections for the JNU Students Union (JNUSU) were underway, the Supreme Court struck down hard, imposing a stay on our elections. The reason for this stay was supposed non-compliance with the Lyngdoh Committee Recommendations. But the perceived violations have nothing to do with money or muscle power. Rather, they are a series of technicalities that lay bare the very politics behind the report. The Lyngdoh report places an age-limit for students contesting elections; it limits the number of times a candidate can stand (regardless of whether s/he loses or wins); it states that political groups cannot be involved in elections; and that in the organization of elections, the university administration must have a central role to play. All these conditions are unacceptable in JNU where we have had a system that is participatory, democratic, ideological and independent. .
The agenda of the Lyngdoh Recommendations is to quell the student movement. It is to prevent student unions from raising their voices against the ruling-class agenda of privatization, commercialization and corporatization in education. For education to become a private fiefdom and a source of corporate profit, students must be silenced and their unions must go. .
.
Facing The Challenge Of The Lyngdoh Report .
The students of JNU and the Joint Struggle Committee (formed in the wake of stay on JNUSU elections in Oct 2008) have challenged the court order through means both political and legal. Ours has been one of the few effective interventions put forward to challenge these recommendations. The questions raised both on democratic validity of these recommendations as well as larger issues of judicial activism and accountability eventually led the matter to be referred to a Constitution Bench. More than two years later, the matter is still pending and the stay continues. .
For us, the struggle against the Lyngdoh Recommendations represents an ongoing political battle. We have no illusions that the problems confronting us are specific to JNU alone. In campuses across the country, a state of undeclared emergency prevails. Students have no basic rights, they are oppressed by the writ of the administration, fees and other user-charges rise rapidly, and even simple protests are met with harsh punishment. To accept the Lyngdoh Recommendations would be to give up our right to an effective and independent union, to the basic rights of self-expression and democratic protest. .
The long-term struggle that confronts us is to restore the strength of an effective student union in the face of the outright neo-liberal assault, and we must rise to meet this challenge with all our strength and creativity. AISA has always given its full support to the programmes of the Joint Struggle Committee (JSC) and even now we call upon the JSC to take forward the struggle for upholding the JNUSU elections in all ways. .
.
Struggles That The Student Community Has Won .
At the present juncture, no one would deny the urgent necessity to conduct elections. The last two years on campus have been marked by a vacuum that has rarely been felt before. It is true that the student community has waged and won many struggles, even in the absence of a fully functional union. These struggles --- whether the overturning of a slew of commercialization proposals in 2009 or the ongoing battle for the correct implementation of OBC reservations --- have been fought by the student community on a day-to-day basis, and have been clinched by the might of student participation and political unity. Such agitations reflect the level of political understanding and maturity of the students of JNU. They have shown all of us and the world at large that the social commitment and political culture of JNU students cannot be crushed by the machinations of the government or its pliant administration; it is an internalized and everyday part of our lives. .
.
How Decision-Making Bodies Have Been Undermined Over Time .
But at the same time, as the attack of the state and the administration grows more vicious, the absence of student representation in various statutory bodies of the university is costing us dearly. For instance, let us take the case of GSCASH. The Gender Sensitization Committee Against Sexual Harassment (GSCASH) is a statutory body, formed after a prolonged student struggle against sexual harassment on campus. It is also completely in keeping with the orders of the Supreme Court in the Visakha judgment. However, for two years now, elections for student representatives to GSCASH have not been held, and in the absence of student representation, the committee is suffering from serious handicaps. .
Similarly, in the last two years, through its arbitrary and undemocratic exercise of power, the JNU Administration has repeatedly done all it can to keep students out of key decision-making bodies. The repeated attempts made by the Dean of Students to clamp down on the student community --- whether through the infamous circular of April 2010 putting curbs on public meetings and freedom of expression or the persistent attempts to tamper with the democratic functioning of hostels and messes --- are a case in point. The most shocking example of the administrations attempts to subvert the key decision-making bodies of the university was seen recently when it unilaterally reversed the decision of the Deans Committee and the Academic Council and went back to its illegal and casteist implementation of OBC reservations in JNUs admissions. .
Such moves by the JNU Administration over the past two years represent attacks on the very foundation of JNU as a university. They willfully seek to undermine our progressive traditions, our participative institutions, our democratic processes that have been built up and upheld over so many years. When the university seeks to deny student participation, when it comes to believe that it rules the university, it becomes all the more necessary for students to assert their rights. In such a situation, legitimate student representation becomes a necessity. .
.
Student Representation in Statutory Bodies: Academic Council, Board of Studies, GSCASH .
Since the struggle for restoring JNUSU is a prolonged one, there are certain rights available to us which must be accessed in current political conditions. This includes representation in various statutory bodies of the university. Statutes 15(1)(x), 15(5), 18(3)(vii) and 18(7) of the JNU Act guarantee student representation in the Academic Council / Board of Studies / Special Committees of the university. For many years and for many reasons, the university did little to implement these P.T.O. .
.
.
.
PaRCha - JNU - AISA material - 2010 ID-25350
.
.
A Call for Holding Elections of Students Representatives .
to JNUs Statutory Bodies in the Current Semester .
The Value Of JNUs Elections .
Elections in JNU were never a token means of choosing representatives. Instead, they were marked by dialogue, discussion and heated debate. Every year, in the run-up to the elections, the outgoing JNUSU would conduct General Body Meetings where students aired their views and elected an Election Committee. In October, when the term of the union would expire, the JNUSU would step down and the next elections would begin. The entire election process --- from the school-level debates to the casting of votes --- was conducted by an Election Committee chosen from among the students themselves. Faculty members and the administration had absolutely no role to play. Financial transparency was strictly ensured and even the threat of violence was dealt with by disenfranchisement. Once the elections began, there was little else to talk about. And for nearly two weeks, the campus was transformed. .
For over two years now, this campus has been without elections. Two batches of JNU students have come and gone without seeing elections, and a third such batch enters campus this year. .
.
The Agenda Of The Lyngdoh Recommendations .
The facts surrounding the matter are by now well known: of how, in October 2008, as elections for the JNU Students Union (JNUSU) were underway, the Supreme Court struck down hard, imposing a stay on our elections. The reason for this stay was supposed non-compliance with the Lyngdoh Committee Recommendations. But the perceived violations have nothing to do with money or muscle power. Rather, they are a series of technicalities that lay bare the very politics behind the report. The Lyngdoh report places an age-limit for students contesting elections; it limits the number of times a candidate can stand (regardless of whether s/he loses or wins); it states that political groups cannot be involved in elections; and that in the organization of elections, the university administration must have a central role to play. All these conditions are unacceptable in JNU where we have had a system that is participatory, democratic, ideological and independent. .
The agenda of the Lyngdoh Recommendations is to quell the student movement. It is to prevent student unions from raising their voices against the ruling-class agenda of privatization, commercialization and corporatization in education. For education to become a private fiefdom and a source of corporate profit, students must be silenced and their unions must go. .
.
Facing The Challenge Of The Lyngdoh Report .
The students of JNU and the Joint Struggle Committee (formed in the wake of stay on JNUSU elections in Oct 2008) have challenged the court order through means both political and legal. Ours has been one of the few effective interventions put forward to challenge these recommendations. The questions raised both on democratic validity of these recommendations as well as larger issues of judicial activism and accountability eventually led the matter to be referred to a Constitution Bench. More than two years later, the matter is still pending and the stay continues. .
For us, the struggle against the Lyngdoh Recommendations represents an ongoing political battle. We have no illusions that the problems confronting us are specific to JNU alone. In campuses across the country, a state of undeclared emergency prevails. Students have no basic rights, they are oppressed by the writ of the administration, fees and other user-charges rise rapidly, and even simple protests are met with harsh punishment. To accept the Lyngdoh Recommendations would be to give up our right to an effective and independent union, to the basic rights of self-expression and democratic protest. .
The long-term struggle that confronts us is to restore the strength of an effective student union in the face of the outright neo-liberal assault, and we must rise to meet this challenge with all our strength and creativity. AISA has always given its full support to the programmes of the Joint Struggle Committee (JSC) and even now we call upon the JSC to take forward the struggle for upholding the JNUSU elections in all ways. .
.
Struggles That The Student Community Has Won .
At the present juncture, no one would deny the urgent necessity to conduct elections. The last two years on campus have been marked by a vacuum that has rarely been felt before. It is true that the student community has waged and won many struggles, even in the absence of a fully functional union. These struggles --- whether the overturning of a slew of commercialization proposals in 2009 or the ongoing battle for the correct implementation of OBC reservations --- have been fought by the student community on a day-to-day basis, and have been clinched by the might of student participation and political unity. Such agitations reflect the level of political understanding and maturity of the students of JNU. They have shown all of us and the world at large that the social commitment and political culture of JNU students cannot be crushed by the machinations of the government or its pliant administration; it is an internalized and everyday part of our lives. .
.
How Decision-Making Bodies Have Been Undermined Over Time .
But at the same time, as the attack of the state and the administration grows more vicious, the absence of student representation in various statutory bodies of the university is costing us dearly. For instance, let us take the case of GSCASH. The Gender Sensitization Committee Against Sexual Harassment (GSCASH) is a statutory body, formed after a prolonged student struggle against sexual harassment on campus. It is also completely in keeping with the orders of the Supreme Court in the Visakha judgment. However, for two years now, elections for student representatives to GSCASH have not been held, and in the absence of student representation, the committee is suffering from serious handicaps. .
Similarly, in the last two years, through its arbitrary and undemocratic exercise of power, the JNU Administration has repeatedly done all it can to keep students out of key decision-making bodies. The repeated attempts made by the Dean of Students to clamp down on the student community --- whether through the infamous circular of April 2010 putting curbs on public meetings and freedom of expression or the persistent attempts to tamper with the democratic functioning of hostels and messes --- are a case in point. The most shocking example of the administrations attempts to subvert the key decision-making bodies of the university was seen recently when it unilaterally reversed the decision of the Deans Committee and the Academic Council and went back to its illegal and casteist implementation of OBC reservations in JNUs admissions. .
Such moves by the JNU Administration over the past two years represent attacks on the very foundation of JNU as a university. They willfully seek to undermine our progressive traditions, our participative institutions, our democratic processes that have been built up and upheld over so many years. When the university seeks to deny student participation, when it comes to believe that it rules the university, it becomes all the more necessary for students to assert their rights. In such a situation, legitimate student representation becomes a necessity. .
.
Student Representation in Statutory Bodies: Academic Council, Board of Studies, GSCASH .
Since the struggle for restoring JNUSU is a prolonged one, there are certain rights available to us which must be accessed in current political conditions. This includes representation in various statutory bodies of the university. Statutes 15(1)(x), 15(5), 18(3)(vii) and 18(7) of the JNU Act guarantee student representation in the Academic Council / Board of Studies / Special Committees of the university. For many years and for many reasons, the university did little to implement these P.T.O. .
.
.
.