PaRCha - JNU - AISA chits - 2005 ID-6952
.
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' UNION 19.11.05.
.
On November 17th 2005, I issued a pamphlet in my official capacity as an elected Councilor in the JNUSU, raising questions about the.
democratic functioning of the JNUSU. I raised these questions because certain members of the current JNUSU had clearly violated.
the democratic norms of the Union, especially in regard to the JNUSU's position regarding the Prime Minister's visit. In response to my.
pamphlet, yesterday a pamphlet was issued by certain representatives of the JNUSU, ostensibly to respond to my claims. However,.
the pamphlet issue by the aforementioned representatives failed to address the issues raised in my pamphlet, and in fact seeks.
to avoid or obfuscate on several of the major questions:.
.
1. The pamphlet avoids addressing the fact that, because it was called less than 24 hours in advance, the "Emergency Meet-.
ing" called on November 13th was INVALID according to the JNUSU constitution. The pamphlet seeks to deflect attention.
towards the JNUSU President and the circumstances in which the meeting was called, thus avoiding the central issue..
NOWHERE does it address the fact that the Joint Secretary and Vice President broke the rules of the JNUSU Constitution.
when they called the meeting..
.
2. In regard to the above-mentioned violation, the pamphlet states that "The SL councilor should have actually refused to attend.
the meeting if this seemed to him as a very serious matter..." In fact, when another councilor raised the issue of the meeting.
being constitutionally invalid, he was told by the Vice President that in order to present any such statement, he would first.
have to sign the attendance sheet and thus "officially attend" the meeting. In other words, the Vice President told those.
of us who objected that we could not even express our opinion that the meeting was invalid unless we "officially attended".
the meeting! Thus the Vice President forced us to either agree to his organization's terms, or be kicked out of the council.
meeting entirely!.
.
3. The pamphlet also erroneously states that "the SL Councilor has falsely stated that the two memoranda submitted to the.
PM and HRD Minister were not voted upon and passed unilaterally in the Council." On the contrary, I did not state that the.
memoranda were not voted on. I stated, quite correctly, that THE "DECISION" TO SUBMIT A MEMO IN LIEU OF A PROTEST.
WAS NOT DEBATED OR VOTED UPON BY THE JNUSU, BUT RATHER WAS UNILATERALLY DECLARED BY THE VICE.
PRESIDENT AND HIS ORGANIZATION. The pamphlet does not even address this issue..
.
4. The tally of votes given in the pamphlet fails to mention that I DID NOT VOTE on either of the memoranda, because as I.
stated in my previous pamphlet, I viewed both as constitutionally invalid and not democratically representing the sentiments.
of the JNU student body..
.
5. The authors of the pamphlet have also stated that they would like to "enlighten" me of the "fact that there has been no such.
norm in the JNUSU of submitting proposals to the Chair personally without allowing all the members of the Council an op-.
portunity to debate on it. This is precisely why resolutions are tabled, debated and passed/rejected in the Council." This.
is my point exactly. I first gave a motion verbally, saying that the meeting was constitutionally invalid and that any vote on.
the memorandum would be similarly invalid, and proposed that instead individual representatives sign on the memorandum.
in their own names, not in the name of the JNUSU, and gave my suggestions for demands to be included in such a mem-.
orandum. The Vice President, who was chairing the meeting, told me to put the proposal in writing, which I did before any.
voting started. STILL, THE VICE PRESIDENT DID NOT PUT MY PROPOSAL FORWARD FOR DEBATE OR VOTE. HE.
IMMEDIATELY PUT THE MEMORANDA TO VOTE AND ADJOURNED THE MEETING. I would like to ask the Vice President.
and other signatories of that pamphlet to "enlighten" me, what else must a JNUSU representative do to have their proposals.
recognized by the chair? I would also like to point out that the proposals of several other councilors present at the meeting,.
both written and verbal, were similarly ignored by the Vice President..
.
6. The following issues put forward in my pamphlet were also not addressed by the authors of the above-mentioned pamphlet:.
.
· Why did the Vice President unilaterally declare both in the meeting with the Vice Chancellor on November 2nd and during the.
.
meeting of JNUSU representatives on November 13th that a memorandum would be submitted to the Prime Minister in lieu of a.
protest, WITHOUT ASKING FOR A DEBATE OR VOTE ON THE ISSUE, OR EVEN CONSULTING ALL THE REPRESENTATIVES.
OF THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?.
.
· Why did the Vice President state in the All Organization Meeting on November 13th that the JNUSU opposed any protest during.
.
the visit of the Prime Minister, when THIS WAS NOT A DECISION TAKEN BY THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?.
.
· Why did the Vice President attempt to prevent students from using certain slogans during the JNUSU protest march on November.
.
13th, saying that the JNUSU had decided against using such slogans, when in actuality NO SUCH DECISION WAS TAKEN BY.
THE COLLECTIVE BODY OF THE JNUSU?.
.
· Why did the Vice President refuse to allow an elected JNUSU representative speak during a JNUSU public meeting, while.
.
allowing an SFI activist who is NOT a member of the JNUSU to speak for more than ten minutes?.
.
Far from being an "assault" on the JNUSU, as the authors of that pamphlet would like the student community to believe,.
my questions are an attempt to ensure that the JNUSU remains a transparent, democratic, and representative body that.
represents the demands and aspirations OF ALL THE STUDENTS OF JNU. I believe that in order to do so, decisions taken in the.
JNUSU MUST BE MADE THROUGH A DEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS, NOT BY THE UNILATERALLY DIKTATS OF INDIVIDUAL.
OFFICE BEARERS. I respectfully challenge the authors and signatories of that pamphlet to address the questions and issues I have.
raised, if they are indeed committed to a democratic JNUSU..
.
And this is more than just a question of parliamentary points of order. As the aforementioned pamphlet impSlide/s-T, yI ldeor bWeliilelivaemthsa,t the.
Councillor, SLL&CS.
..
PaRCha - JNU - AISA chits - 2005 ID-6952
.
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' UNION 19.11.05.
.
On November 17th 2005, I issued a pamphlet in my official capacity as an elected Councilor in the JNUSU, raising questions about the.
democratic functioning of the JNUSU. I raised these questions because certain members of the current JNUSU had clearly violated.
the democratic norms of the Union, especially in regard to the JNUSU's position regarding the Prime Minister's visit. In response to my.
pamphlet, yesterday a pamphlet was issued by certain representatives of the JNUSU, ostensibly to respond to my claims. However,.
the pamphlet issue by the aforementioned representatives failed to address the issues raised in my pamphlet, and in fact seeks.
to avoid or obfuscate on several of the major questions:.
.
1. The pamphlet avoids addressing the fact that, because it was called less than 24 hours in advance, the "Emergency Meet-.
ing" called on November 13th was INVALID according to the JNUSU constitution. The pamphlet seeks to deflect attention.
towards the JNUSU President and the circumstances in which the meeting was called, thus avoiding the central issue..
NOWHERE does it address the fact that the Joint Secretary and Vice President broke the rules of the JNUSU Constitution.
when they called the meeting..
.
2. In regard to the above-mentioned violation, the pamphlet states that "The SL councilor should have actually refused to attend.
the meeting if this seemed to him as a very serious matter..." In fact, when another councilor raised the issue of the meeting.
being constitutionally invalid, he was told by the Vice President that in order to present any such statement, he would first.
have to sign the attendance sheet and thus "officially attend" the meeting. In other words, the Vice President told those.
of us who objected that we could not even express our opinion that the meeting was invalid unless we "officially attended".
the meeting! Thus the Vice President forced us to either agree to his organization's terms, or be kicked out of the council.
meeting entirely!.
.
3. The pamphlet also erroneously states that "the SL Councilor has falsely stated that the two memoranda submitted to the.
PM and HRD Minister were not voted upon and passed unilaterally in the Council." On the contrary, I did not state that the.
memoranda were not voted on. I stated, quite correctly, that THE "DECISION" TO SUBMIT A MEMO IN LIEU OF A PROTEST.
WAS NOT DEBATED OR VOTED UPON BY THE JNUSU, BUT RATHER WAS UNILATERALLY DECLARED BY THE VICE.
PRESIDENT AND HIS ORGANIZATION. The pamphlet does not even address this issue..
.
4. The tally of votes given in the pamphlet fails to mention that I DID NOT VOTE on either of the memoranda, because as I.
stated in my previous pamphlet, I viewed both as constitutionally invalid and not democratically representing the sentiments.
of the JNU student body..
.
5. The authors of the pamphlet have also stated that they would like to "enlighten" me of the "fact that there has been no such.
norm in the JNUSU of submitting proposals to the Chair personally without allowing all the members of the Council an op-.
portunity to debate on it. This is precisely why resolutions are tabled, debated and passed/rejected in the Council." This.
is my point exactly. I first gave a motion verbally, saying that the meeting was constitutionally invalid and that any vote on.
the memorandum would be similarly invalid, and proposed that instead individual representatives sign on the memorandum.
in their own names, not in the name of the JNUSU, and gave my suggestions for demands to be included in such a mem-.
orandum. The Vice President, who was chairing the meeting, told me to put the proposal in writing, which I did before any.
voting started. STILL, THE VICE PRESIDENT DID NOT PUT MY PROPOSAL FORWARD FOR DEBATE OR VOTE. HE.
IMMEDIATELY PUT THE MEMORANDA TO VOTE AND ADJOURNED THE MEETING. I would like to ask the Vice President.
and other signatories of that pamphlet to "enlighten" me, what else must a JNUSU representative do to have their proposals.
recognized by the chair? I would also like to point out that the proposals of several other councilors present at the meeting,.
both written and verbal, were similarly ignored by the Vice President..
.
6. The following issues put forward in my pamphlet were also not addressed by the authors of the above-mentioned pamphlet:.
.
· Why did the Vice President unilaterally declare both in the meeting with the Vice Chancellor on November 2nd and during the.
.
meeting of JNUSU representatives on November 13th that a memorandum would be submitted to the Prime Minister in lieu of a.
protest, WITHOUT ASKING FOR A DEBATE OR VOTE ON THE ISSUE, OR EVEN CONSULTING ALL THE REPRESENTATIVES.
OF THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?.
.
· Why did the Vice President state in the All Organization Meeting on November 13th that the JNUSU opposed any protest during.
.
the visit of the Prime Minister, when THIS WAS NOT A DECISION TAKEN BY THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?.
.
· Why did the Vice President attempt to prevent students from using certain slogans during the JNUSU protest march on November.
.
13th, saying that the JNUSU had decided against using such slogans, when in actuality NO SUCH DECISION WAS TAKEN BY.
THE COLLECTIVE BODY OF THE JNUSU?.
.
· Why did the Vice President refuse to allow an elected JNUSU representative speak during a JNUSU public meeting, while.
.
allowing an SFI activist who is NOT a member of the JNUSU to speak for more than ten minutes?.
.
Far from being an "assault" on the JNUSU, as the authors of that pamphlet would like the student community to believe,.
my questions are an attempt to ensure that the JNUSU remains a transparent, democratic, and representative body that.
represents the demands and aspirations OF ALL THE STUDENTS OF JNU. I believe that in order to do so, decisions taken in the.
JNUSU MUST BE MADE THROUGH A DEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS, NOT BY THE UNILATERALLY DIKTATS OF INDIVIDUAL.
OFFICE BEARERS. I respectfully challenge the authors and signatories of that pamphlet to address the questions and issues I have.
raised, if they are indeed committed to a democratic JNUSU..
.
And this is more than just a question of parliamentary points of order. As the aforementioned pamphlet impSlide/s-T, yI ldeor bWeliilelivaemthsa,t the.
Councillor, SLL&CS.
..