ABVP welcomes the move to revoke Jammu and Kashmir’s special status with dhols, garlands, sweets, and slogans in the Faculty of Arts of the University of Delhi (DU) today.
The party members of Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of BJP affiliated to RSS, gathered in the Faculty of Arts of University of Delhi today to celebrate the abolition of Article 370, and Article 35A of the Indian Constitution that granted special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir along with Ladakh.
This article provides special autonomy to the state in the Constitution of India. This article, along with Article 35A, defined that the Jammu and Kashmir residents live under a separate set of laws, including those related to citizenship, ownership of property and fundamental rights as compared to residents of other Indian states.
In a historical move, this article was scrapped by the BJP-led Government today in the parliament.
The celebrations, which commenced from 3:30 pm, saw ABVP workers marching into the faculty gates accompanied by drummers. ABVP members commemorated the event by putting garlands, and showering flowers on the statue of Swami Vivekananda in the faculty premises.
Lead by the ABVP North Delhi head Mr. Bharat Sharma, chants of Bharat Mata Ki Jai and Vande Mataramcould be heard all over the premises. “Yeh humare liye hi nahi, ek ek desh wasi ke liye, ek ek kashmir wasi ke liye ek moment of pride hai (This is a moment of pride, not just for us, but for each and every Indian, for each and every Kashmiri.)”, said Mr. Sharma.
Mr. Sidharth Yadav, Delhi State Secretary, ABVP, proclaimed, “For the first time today, this generation has seen an independent India”.
The celebrations went on to see hundreds in the Arts Faculty, with ABVP flags, dancing and distributing sweets. Mr. Ashutosh Singh, State Media Incharge for the ABVP said, “Governmentko abhi sabse zyada Kashmiri locals ka bharosa jeetne ki zaroorat hai kyunki humlog unke saath me hain, (What the Government needs to do right now, is to win the trust of local Kashmiris because we are all with them,)”
Shri Srinivas, the National Joint Organising Secretary of ABVP, also addressed the gathering after distribution of sweets amongst the students, and party workers, “We have been struggling due to the actions of Mr. Nehru. Now any citizen can work in Jammu and Kashmir and live there. It’s a revolutionary day.” In conversation with DU Beat, he added, “ek sarthak behes desh bhar me honi chahiye, above party politics, ki vaastav me 370 ne Jammu and Kashmir ki janata ka fayda kiya ya nuksan kiya… aur desh ka har parliament member jab desh ki parliament me khade hota hai aur desh ki ekta aur akhandta ki shapath leta hai, to mujhe lagta hai ki woh shapath ko pura karne ka time aa gaya hai(There should be a meaningful debate on the pros and cons of article 370, above party politics… since every parliament member of the country takes a pledge for the unity of the country in the parliament, it’s time they fulfill their pledge,)”
Amidst the dance and dhols, the DUSU President Mr. Shakti Singh had the following to say to DU Beat, when asked about his concerns regarding the students from Jammu and Kashmir studying in DU, “It’s all propaganda and false information being provided to the students, there is nothing for the students to be afraid of, they are safe and will be so.”
The celebrations that lasted for hours had workers dancing and embracing each other in this festivity celebrating the abolition.
Feature Image Credits: Abhinandan Kaul for DU Beat.
The University of Delhi (DU) recently saw a row emerge over the proposed syllabus changes in some undergraduate courses. To understand this better, we spoke to some of the key players involved.
The story developed rapidly in the last couple of weeks in what has now become an ideological battle as various organisations clashed over proposed changes in a variety of the University’s undergraduate programmes – English, History, Political Science, Sociology. Both sides levied a number of accusations on the other – in essence, ranging from trying to manipulate academic spaces to spreading propaganda against certain ideologies. However, some claim that the issue is not a Left vs Right matter at all.
A few characters seem important to this story: Professor Rasal Singh, the Academic Council (AC) member who opposed these proposals; the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which protested against these changes; a host of Left organisations like the Students’ Federation of India (SFI), All India Students’ Association (AISA), Collective, and others, who staged counter-protests against the ABVP’s demonstration; Professor Saikat Ghosh, another AC member who defended the recommendations of the departments. Our conversation with Professor Sanam Khanna, who was involved in the syllabus drafting exercise, is also of great interest.
But first, here’s the background. After objections from within the AC and the protests by the ABVP over the alleged negative portrayal of the RSS and its affiliates, and what was called “inclusion of false facts relating to Hinduism and nationalist organisations,” organisations like the SFI, AISA, Collective and others staged a ‘joint protest’ in return. As reported by The Indian Express, the University’s English department has decided to drop the “objectionable” portions as it did not want to “hurt anyone’s sentiments”. With “minor modifications,” changes in the Political Science and Sociology courses were reportedly passed, while the Head of Department of History said that the department may “consider changes”.
{One}
In a long text sent to us by Professor Rasal Singh, he detailed the reasons for his opposition to the proposed syllabus changes. Some of the more widely reported reasons were his objections over the alleged depiction of the RSS and its affiliates as “looters” and “murderers” in the story Maniben Alias Bibijaan – a background to the infamous 2002 Gujarat riots – and also the usage of Hindu deities, such as Vishnu, Shiv, Kartikeya and Ganesh, in readings about queerness, based on what he called secondary sources “written by Leftists on the basis of foundational texts of Indian culture like the Bhagavata Purana, Skanda Purana, and Shiva Purana.”
While his right-wing leanings might be apparent above, he also cited some concerns – which were not as widely reported – that perhaps blur the typical ‘rightist’ and ‘leftist’ lines, as we generally understand them. Among these were the alleged removal of the histories of Amir Khusrau, Sher Shah Suri and Dr B.R. Ambedkar, along with those of the Rajputs; the absence of social movements like Bacha Khan’s Khudai Khidmatgar movement; the removal of topics on environmental discussions and nature worship in Sociology courses. In addition, he also alleged that the English Department had made close to “100 per cent” changes in the syllabus, instead of 30 per cent, as supposedly mandated under the rules of the Choice Based Credit System (CBCS) curriculum. Yet, he also stated that the syllabus showed “tremendous predominance of leftist ideology and a ceaseless opposition towards nationalist ideology, Indian culture and the RSS”.
For more details on why the revised syllabus faced objections, read this author’s previous piece here.
We asked Mr Singh what was a bigger reason for his objection – the content of the proposed chapters or the English department allegedly not following the ‘30 per cent’ CBCS rule. While he said that the latter was also an issue, the content of the chapters remained more problematic. Objecting to what he called the “monopoly” of one ideology (read leftism) in the syllabus revision exercise, he said that a more inclusive process, accounting for teachers with “diverse ideologies and specialisations,” would have been less controversial.
At this point, we wondered whether Mr Singh had some reservations about the ideology of the left itself. He denied. He said that he did not have any issues with the priorities and politics of the left, but with their “exclusive” presence in the process. “Inclusion of other ideologies in the process would have made for better discourse,” he said. Mr Singh’s reservations over the inclusivity of the process also extended to the sources of information supposedly used. Claiming that most news sources used for the Gujarat and Muzaffarnagar riots case studies – The Wire, Scroll, Al Jazeera, to name a few – were ideologically-driven and not mainstream either, he said that other sources, such as Aaj Tak, ABP News, NDTV and The Indian Express, should also have been used.
An SFI press release had mentioned other instances of what they called attempts by the RSS and its “frontal organisations” to “tamper with the education curriculums”. There had also been allegations – such as the one by Professor Nandita Narain, former President of Delhi University Teachers’ Association (DUTA) – that the ABVP protest turned hostile wherein the protesters allegedly demanded that the Heads of Department of English and History departments of the University and AC member Professor Saikat Ghosh be “handed over” to them. Mr Singh – an ABVP leader during his student days – denounced violence and misbehaviour against teachers perpetrated by any organisation. However, he claimed with “full responsibility” that these allegations were false. Christening the ABVP “the most culture-conscious party” out of all student organisations, he said that while the protesters did enter the Vice-Chancellor’s office, they did not enter the Council Hall. “I’m disappointed that some AC members called the students ‘goonda’; students are also important stakeholders [in determining the syllabus],” he said.
{Two}
“This is the most ridiculous allegation that can be heard,” says Siddharth Yadav, the Delhi State Secretary of ABVP, when we ask him about the veracity of the alleged hostile nature of his party’s protest. “We have fundamentally opposed the changes, both technically and ideologically. Why would we demand the teachers be handed over? I don’t even know who comes up with these things. Technically we oppose the process which was adopted for these changes. We have been demanding student representation in the academic council for a long time. A handful of teachers made the entire course without any discussion with the stakeholders. This was our second protest in a row to prevent the mishappening,” he adds.
In their press release, the ABVP had said that they don’t want the “anti-Hindu mindset of the left” to dominate the curricula. However, professor Rasal Singh of the AC had raised other objections also. Was the ABVP against those issues as well or only against RSS’ alleged negative portrayal? We posed this question to Mr Yadav, to which his response was: “Ideologically we are opposing a lot of changes. All Dalit writers have been removed from ‘Hindi Upanyas’ curriculum, Ambedkar’s name has been removed from Dalit thinkers, Godhra riots have been wrongfully presented, a lot of ancient history has been deleted and only the colonial period is focused upon, Maoism and Naxalism is shown as a social movement, Hindu gods and goddesses have been wrongfully commented upon by relying on secondary sources and the list goes on.”
Saying that “all we wanted” was a “review of the syllabus”, Mr Yadav said that there was “a lot more than what is being told. I hope it comes out soon.”
{Three}
The Vice-President of SFI Delhi State, Sumit Kataria, says, “Whenever the BJP has been in power, they’ve always attacked our education system”.
There is a general belief that the academia is largely populated by left-liberals. From some of the most prominent historians of our country, who tend to belong to Marxist schools of thought, to litterateurs critical of the right-wing, there probably is a presence of a more left-oriented academia. After all, the ABVP and Professor Rasal Singh expressed clear displeasure over the alleged leftist character of the revised syllabi. This situation is perhaps not even unique to India either; conservatives in the United States have been claiming for quite some time now that their voices in the university spaces are shrinking. We asked Mr Kataria if he felt that there was a general dominance of the left in academia and if that could make the right-wing voices feel that they are not heard properly. “To say that there is a general dominance of the left ideology is a very ahistorical statement. When has the left ever dominated the academia? It [academia] has always been dominated by the elite and the upper caste sections in India. The left is not in power, so how can we dominate?” he responds. “It is the right-wing organisations’ propaganda and nothing else.”
Now that the revised syllabus has been taken back, essentially ending things the way the ABVP wanted, do parties like the SFI consider it a loss? Mr Kataria says, “It doesn’t mean that ABVP has won. It is our education system that has been defeated and not SFI or any other organisation…These are just attempts at destroying our democratic education system.”
{Four}
Professor Saikat Ghosh. AC member. Professor of English. Allegedly wanted by the ABVP to be “handed over”. Speaking to Mr Ghosh brings a few twists, and confusions, in the story.
He tells us that the information about the alleged “handing over” demand of the ABVP was given to him by the security personnel at the Viceregal Lodge, where the office of the Vice-Chancellor is located. “We were told by the security guards to disperse from the University premises at the earliest as the threat of violence is real.” He further added, “We were escorted out of a back entrance of the Viceregal Lodge in a clandestine way. We were also told that the lights surrounding the Garden outside the Viceregal Lodge were switched off by the ABVP to ensure that CCTV becomes ineffective in the case of an actual physical attack.”
“Unfortunate and indicative of vindictive rejection of the English Dept’s academic autonomy,” was how Mr Ghosh described the resultant withdrawal of the proposed syllabus by the English department. Claiming that the department’s “academic arguments are not being heeded,” Mr Ghosh alleged that the University Undergraduate Curriculum Revision Committee – tasked with overseeing the revision process – had “taken the role of a bully on behalf of the ABVP and NDTF (National Democratic Teachers’ Front)” – both linked to the RSS.
While Mr Singh had called for consultations with more teachers to ensure inclusivity in the process – he said only around 15 teachers of the English department drafted most of the new syllabus – Mr Ghosh contradicted him. “Prof. Rasal Singh is conveniently hiding the fact that 120+ teachers from across 50 DU colleges participated in the English syllabus revision,” he claimed. He further said that an “open call” was given in the English teachers’ General Body Meeting (GBM) in 2017 for voluntary participation in the syllabus revision, of which the “right-wing” teachers chose not to be a part. “Students, alumni and peers in the international academia recorded overwhelming praise,” he said about the revised syllabus, which was supposedly open for “public review and feedback for a month”.
“The NDTF and ABVP seemed to be sleeping through the entire exercise. The RSS is politicising it and not engaging with the academic merits of the syllabus,” he alleged. When we asked Mr Singh whether this was true, he replied that he said “whatever is fact.”
Mr Ghosh profoundly disagrees about the whole issue being an ideological one. He has been associated with the SFI in the past, but strictly maintains that his support for the syllabus has been on academic grounds and that he has not “asserted any party agenda.” He also said that many of the teachers involved in the exercise did not belong to any political background.
“The issue is not a battle between the Right and the Left. It is being given an ideological colour by those who don’t want the English department to give its students a world-class syllabus that allows them to engage with contemporary social and aesthetic concerns. The people opposed to the English syllabus are being unfair to thousands of students who dream of pursuing an English Honours degree from DU colleges,” he said.
Was the process really ideological in nature? Were only members of a certain ideology considered for the syllabus revision exercised, as alleged by some? Or was there an attempt made by the departments to accommodate as many teachers in the drafting exercise as possible, as was claimed by some others?
Professor Sanam Khanna, a teacher of English at Kamala Nehru College, also participated in the syllabus revision exercise. She said that the whole syllabus drafting exercise, which began two years ago, went something like this: “The English department called a General Body Meeting of all teachers from across the University. From the GBM, subcommittees were formed to look after clusters of papers. The drafting process starts from there based on what the teachers feel the students need, the shortcomings of the current syllabi, and feedback from their departments.”
DU Beat got access to some of the emails, dated 2017, which were sent as intimation regarding the syllabus drafting exercise.
E-mail 1E-mail 2The emails accessed by DU Beat show that invitations to be a part of the syllabus revision process were sent to a large number of professors and colleges.
The first and second images of the email dating 30 August 2017 show that the revision exercise was already underway at least as early as September 2017. Here, a clear request has been made for publicising the email as widely as possible and suggestions and recommendations have been invited. The email was sent by Professor Christel R. Devadawson, the then English HoD. The second email – also by Professor Devadawson – dated 29 October 2017, was sent to 357 recipients. The email seems to be about the committee on revising the syllabi for the core courses – an indication that multiple people were involved in the drafting exercise. “Mails such as these were sent to all principals and colleges as well as English teachers’ groups and email lists, inviting suggestions and participation,” Ms Khanna said. “So how can anyone say the process was ‘limited’? Whoever was interested came, attended and worked for over two years,” she added.
Ms Khanna also denied any ideological motivation behind the syllabi. “This is a huge collective effort. It decolonised the study of literature. For the first time in DU, so many Indian authors have been introduced in the syllabus. More than 100 Indian authors across different time periods and genres [were included]. What is leftist here? It is deeply painful to hear such unacademic responses,” she said.
We tried contacting Professor Sunil Kumar, the HoD of the History Department, via email but he did not respond to our queries by the time of publishing this article.
{Five}
What may have started as a purely academic exercise has now taken the form of an ideological and political tussle. The organisations holding protest after protest all come from one or the other ideological leaning; and the demonstrations seem to have taken an ugly shape. While all the politics is fair and well, we do wonder if the agitating parties have gone through the newly proposed texts. For all their claims of holding dialectics and discussion in high regard, did the right engage enough with the left and vice-versa? We may never know.
However, as things stand, another protest was held on 23rd July. Two days earlier, the revised syllabus was put before the Executive Council of the University for final approval; it was sent back for revision. Mr Singh welcomed this decision of referring back what he called the “propagandist” and “non-inclusive” syllabus to the respective departments. He said that the syllabi of these departments should be “comprehensively reviewed by including more teachers and stakeholders in the exercise.” He however expressed disappointment as “the teachers are hardly given any reasonable time to comprehensively and critically analyse all contents of these departments. The cosmetic and superficial approach on such an important academic matter will not serve the purpose.”
An oversight committee is now tasked with finalising the syllabi by 31 July. The syllabi of these departments was supposed to take effect from the current session onwards. While the revised syllabi of many other courses has been approved, as available on the University website, that of these departments hangs in the balance. Ms Khanna hints at this when she says, “We are worried about our students who are without a syllabus when every day is precious in this short semester system.”
March in defence of academic freedom and Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad’s (ABVP) interference in the syllabus making of various departments of the University of Delhi, namely English, History, Sociology and Political Science took place at the Faculty of Arts on 23rd July amid tensions between the ABVP, departments involved and other student bodies. The protest took a political turn when the members of ABVP and Delhi University Students Union (DUSU) held a counter-protest expressing dissent over the protest.
Students from the English Department and student unions like Students Federation of India (SFI), All India Students Association (AISA), Krantikari Yuva Sangathan (KYS), Pinjra Tod, along with the Delhi University Teacher’s Association (DUTA) held a march in the north campus of DU against ABVP’s opposition to DU’s syllabus-making process. An exercise that was meant to be academic in nature took a distinctly political turn at the meeting of the standing committee on academic matters, where the syllabus was presented on11th July. Rasal Singh, an elected representative of the National Democratic Teachers’ Front (NDTF) which is supposedly aligned with the ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS), took issue with parts of the English syllabus that he wanted to be removed and some of the history syllabus that he wanted to be added.
The protest came in the wake of the episode of ABVP barging into the compound of the Vice Regal Lodge, and was rumoured to be asking for three professors, including the Heads of English and History department, to be handed over to them. Since then, ABVP has been protesting against those departments.
Kawalpreet Kaur, Delhi State President of AISA said, “It is well known that the syllabus of Delhi University has an unmatching standard. This owes to the professors who worked hard to maintain the DU’s academic quality. Clearly, ABVP’s intervention calls for systematic destruction of the course content of Delhi University. It is high time that we should all join hands and resist all such moves.”
Changes in the syllabus proposed by the English department of the University were opposed in a meeting of the Standing Committee to review the Undergraduate syllabus on 11th July. Among the proposals was the inclusion of study materials related to the role of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in the 2002 Gujarat riots, and use of Hindu deities in the reading of Queer Literature. DU, having one of the most prestigious and world-class education in humanities and social sciences intends to provoke a critical faculty among the students. However, the references to Hindu deities and Gujarat riots have irked the right-wing forces.
Mahima Chaudhary, a student of Hindu college told DU Beat, “In an academic institution, no party has any right to dictate what should be taught and what not. It is truly fascist and undemocratic.”
Protesters at the Faculty of Arts.
ABVP and Delhi University Students Union (DUSU) have sought support from the academic world for representation of the students with regards to the inclusion of three R’s in the syllabus i.e. representation, review of the syllabus and rational debate. ABVP emphasised on the need for democratisation of academia. However, the intimidation and threatening nature of dissent ABVP used turned out to be anything but democratic.
Addressing the students, Sachin Narayanan, who teaches English at Dyal Singh College, said, “The controversy over the short story ‘Maniben alias Bibijan’ exposes the sinister designs of RSS-BJP government-backed groups and individuals in academia. Factually, neither this story nor the text containing this story was part of the Syllabus Committee’s proposed Undergraduate Programme English language syllabus at any stage. Bunch of lies are being spread to misguide people which must be exposed.”
Given the fact that the revised syllabus was uploaded on the website of the respective departments in the month of May, and feedback from the public was invited before it was presented before the University’s statutory bodies on 11th July, none of the objections was raised, giving the whole syllabus-making process a political turn. The protest took a political turn when ABVP and DUSU held a counter-protest outside the office of HoDs of 5 Departments of English, Sociology, Political Science, History, and Hindi. Headed by the President, Shakti Singh, members were seen shouting slogans like, “Tum naxalvaad se desh todoge, hum rashtravaad se jodenge” and criticised communist and left-wing forces in the campus. The campus had a heavy presence of police in view of the political turn the events had taken.
ABVP Protesters at Faculty of Arts
Shakti Singh told DU Beat, “The way in which Hindu deities are being depicted in the syllabus is very unfortunate. We have written to the Chancellor of DU for the students’ representation in the syllabus making process, and we demand the administration to bring in a new syllabus considering the demands of the students.”
“The entire left-wing professors and the administration of Delhi University must be held responsible for this.” he further added.
The fact of the linkages between Hindu deities and LGBTQ being regarded as “unfortunate” is itself contradictory for a progressive institution like DU. The academic fervour of the University stands threatened and vulnerable by the political turn the events have taken. The subjects of humanities and social sciences are undoubtedly political in nature; however, they also amalgamate the confluence of various thought of schools and discourses. Turning a blind eye and creating a political situation on a dominant opinion threatens the academic stimulation of the various courses being taught in the University. The consequences of the ideological warfare have to be borne by the students and the politicisation of an academic affair raises eyebrows over the academic autonomy of the University
Feature Image Credits: Sriya Rane and Noihrit Gogoi for DU Beat
The University of Delhi (DU) works as a microcosm of the world. And like the bigger picture, it has its own sense of politics. Here is a brief intro to Delhi University Student’s Union (DUSU) and its significance.
Many big names in contemporary Indian politics have had a stint in their college elections. Be it Arun Jaitley, president of the DUSU in 1974, or Kanhaiya Kumar, the Students Union President of Jawaharlal Nehru University; these elections seem like a foundation for a career in politics.
The DUSU is a student body which held its first elections in 1954. It is the body which regulates and renegotiates the policies, rules and regulations agreed on by the varsity. DUSU actively involves itself in student-related issues and problems, tries to resolve them by pursuing the administration and works for the welfare of the students. DUSU has actively involved itself in the admission-related processes and issues of students.
However, this entity is not free from dirty politics and hooliganism. The student politicians are infamous for staging protests, illegal activities, and unnecessary violence. The rivalry between ABVP (Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad)— student-wing of the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)—and National Students’ Union of India (NSUI)—student-wing of the Indian National Congress (INC)—is representative of their much larger right-versus-left conflict.
Supplementing this circle of politics are organisations like Pinjra Tod, Student’s Federation of India (SFI), All India Student’s Association (AISA), Democratic Student’s Union (DSU), Krantikari Yuva Sanghatan (KYS) and many others.
The most important takeaway from the DUSU and its functioning for the university students is that it allows students to have an opportunity to contemplate their political choices, their freedom to vote, and the ‘apparent’ legacy of their family opinions. The first vote a DU student casts is for this simulation of National democracy.
Jaishree Kumar, a final year student of History from Ramjas College has experienced this circus for the past two years. She states, “Politics in the university can be intimidating, but it’s also a reflection of National politics, and in some ways, a caricature of it. Its apparent omnipresence is suffocating sometimes, but don’t get deterred by their loudness. Their freebies and niceness don’t matter. Their ‘may I help you’ signs disappear once the elections are over. Don’t run away from the politics, don’t take pride in calling yourself ‘apolitical’, don’t follow an ideology which has been passed down your family. You’re a university student, question everything.”
Some first-time witnesses of DUSU politics, like Prateek Pankaj from Hindu College call it “a social laboratory to understand how politics at the larger scale works”. He says, “More than anything, it teaches how democracy lives and breathes around us. When you see people protesting against the dismissal of sanitation workers or for the rights of ad-hoc teachers, it tells you how issues actually impact people.”
A humble advice to all the freshers: be aware, be involved and be alert. Form your own political opinions. I myself have experienced this ‘House of Shards’ for the first time last year, and I am already looking forward to this year’s dynamics.
Feature Image Caption: Students queued to cast their votes during DUSU Elections 2018-19.
Recent proposals for changes in the syllabi of various undergraduate courses have sparked opposition from the teaching staff, and the ABVP.
Controversy over academic matters arose in the University of Delhi (DU), with some members of the Standing Committee and the Academic Council (AC), along with the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) taking objections to some of the proposed changes in the syllabi of various undergraduate courses.
The controversy has taken the form of opposition from Academic Council members and protests by the ABVP, which some had alleged to have turned hostile.
The Background
A report in The Hindu stated that changes in the syllabus proposed by the English department of the University were opposed in a meeting of the Standing Committee to review the Undergraduate syllabus on 11th July. Among the proposals was the inclusion of study materials related to the role of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in the 2002 Gujarat riots, and use of Hindu deities in the reading of Queer Literature.
Similar was the case with the English Journalism syllabus. As reported by The New Indian Express on 15th July, objection was raised by some members of the Academic Council over the inclusion of chapters about Muzaffarnagar riots, and instances of lynchings.
On 17th July, The Indian Express reported about the syllabus changes of other courses and the objections that came along with them. These included syllabi of History, Political Science and Sociology, along with English. The report stated that the Academic Council “referred the syllabus of English and History back to the respective departmentsfor reconsideration, thereby refusing to pass it as it is.” The report further read, “On the syllabi for Political Science and Sociology, some AC members said they too had been sent back for modification, while others claimed they were passed with ‘minor modifications’.”
Who objected and why?
Professor Rasal Singh, a member of the Academic Council, had raised objections regarding the syllabus changes. He alleged that in the story Maniben Alias Bibijaan – a background to the 2002 Gujarat riots – RSS and its affiliate organisations like Bajrang Dal were shown in a “very bad manner”, and were portrayed as “looters” and “murderers”.
He further said that in the syllabus proposed by the English department, “Gods Vishnu, Shiv, Kartikeya and Ganesh were depicted as part of the LGBT community. The sources and evidence for these were secondary sources like ‘Same Sex Love in India’ written by Leftists on the basis of foundational texts of Indian culture such as the Bhagavata Purana, Skanda Purana, and Shiva Purana.” He also alleged that “too much Literature was being incorporated in a paper like ‘Communication Skills’. Instead of core courses like ‘Indian Writing in English’, new papers such as ‘Literature and Caste’ and ‘Interrogating Queerness’ were started.”
Regarding the History department, he said that “[topics about] Rajput history, Amir Khusrau, Sher Shah Suri and Babasaheb Ambedkar were removed from the syllabus. In the ‘Democracy on Work’ course, only the history of Naxalism and the Left have been included.”
He also said that the topics related to the Vedic society, the joint family, village swaraj, and “basics of Indian cultural thought such as environmental discussions and nature worship” were removed from the Sociology syllabus. On the Political Science front, according to Mr Singh, Maoism had been included in the course on ‘Indian Social Movements’, while other social movements like the Ramakrishna Mission, Arya Samaj, Brahma Samaj, and Khudai Khidmatgar were removed.
Mr Singh also alleged that the English department had not complied with the format and instructions of the Choice-Based Credit System (CBCS) and instead of a 30 percent change in the syllabus, close to a 100 percent change had been done.
The syllabus showed “tremendous predominance of leftist ideology and a ceaseless opposition towards nationalist ideology, Indian culture and the RSS,” Mr Singh said.
The ABVP, the student-wing of the RSS, organised a protest on 15th July, against the “inclusion of false facts relating to Hinduism and nationalist organisations.” The ABVP also demanded for the “inclusion of elected office bearers of Delhi University Students’ Union in the Academic Council,” as per a press release made by the student organisation on 16th July.
While some alleged that the ABVP tried to “barge into” the Vice Chancellor’s office and demanded that the Heads of Department of English and History, and Academic Council member Saikat Ghosh be “handed over to them,” the student organisation maintained that the protest was “peaceful.”
“Following the protest of ABVP yesterday, Delhi University administration has withdrawn the proposed syllabus of Political Science, English, History and Sociology courses for revision and decided to retain 5 students as members in the Academic Council,” said Ashutosh Singh from the ABVP.
Note – Mr Ghosh could not respond to requests for comments by the time of publishing of this report. This report would be updated as and when he does.
Similar instances in the past
In October last year, the ABVP had objected to the appointment of historian Ramachandra Guha as the Shrenik Lalbhai Chair Professor of Humanities and the Director of the Gandhi Winter School at the Ahmedabad University’s School of Arts and Sciences. Pravin Desai, the ABVP Secretary for Ahmedabad city was quoted in The Indian Express as saying,“We said that we want intellectuals in our educational institutes and not anti-nationals, who can also be termed as ‘urban Naxals’. We had quoted anti-national content from his [Guha’s] books to the Registrar. We told him, the person you are calling is a ‘Communist’. If he is invited to Gujarat, there would be a JNU-kind ‘anti-national’ sentiment.”
Following this, Mr Guha announced that he would not be taking up this position due to “circumstances beyond my control.”
Counter-protests
Some student organisations have condemned the ABVP’s protests. Organisations such as the Students’ Federation of India (SFI), All India Students’ Association (AISA), Collective, and others had called for a ‘joint protest’ on 17th July at the Arts Faculty, to “save our critical thinking universities and textbooks from communal forces.”
Amarjeet Kumar Singh from AISA said, “We demand that the syllabus should be decided by the Academic Council and not by the ABVP.”
The continuing problems related to admissions in the varsity have raised several questions on the functionality of the administration.
Student organisations Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) and National Students Union of India (NSUI) of the University of Delhi (DU) have voiced their concerns and demonstrated against the DU Vice Chancellor regarding the difficulties faced by students during the time of admissions. The demonstation also sought to question the fee hike that has taken place for almost all courses in the University.
ABVP has voiced the concerns of the students by protesting at the Arts Faculty, addressing various issues related to admissions. The increment in college fees has been challenged along with irregularity in Sports Category admissions. Provision of admission by accepting undertaking, and introduction of EWS category in M. Phil/ PhD admissions has been requested. Importantly, inadequate arrangement in colleges for parents at the time of the admission process are some of the issues amongst other key issues that have been raised by the ABVP.
They (ABVP) has brought into the limelight how the admission staff in colleges who were admitting students to the first cut-off were not aware of the rules prescribed by the University. This caused problems in the smooth functioning during the admissions process. Admissions of students were also cancelled due to loopholes in the admission process.
Siddharth Yadav, the State Secretary of ABVP Delhi, said that if the demands are not met within the time period of ten days, then there will be more resolute protests against the administration.
DUSU President Shakti Singh also highlighted the issue of fee hike by saying, “There has been an arbitrary unaccounted fee increase in many DU colleges.” The issue Ramjas College’s fee hike has been previously reported on by DU Beat.
A memorandum to the Dean of Students Welfare had been submitted after the protest ended by the the ABVP delegation.
Attempts have been made by the student organisations so that the DU admission process does not become tedious and burdensome for the students. The true effects of the protests remain to be seen.
University of Delhi is set to get a new hostel, as a proposal by the Delhi University Students Union (DUSU) President Shakti Singh is approved by Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath to allocate funds of INR 48 crore.
According to a press release by the Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), Yogi Adityanath, the Chief Minister (CM) of Uttar Pradesh is set to provide INR 48 crore for a new University of Delhi’s (DU) Hostel.
A proposal by Shakti Singh dated the 10th of June was approved by CM Yogi Adityanath the same day. The proposal addresses the difficulties faced by DU students while looking for student accommodation. The proposal also highlights that only 1-2% of students from Uttar Pradesh get hostel accommodation.
The new hostel requires approximately 3 acres of land to be built. The hostel is said to have 500 seats, and sports facilities over INR 3 crore. The total cost, including overhead charges amounts to INR 48 crore. The hostel is set to be constructed on the Uttar Pradesh government’s land in Delhi.
DUSU President Shakti Singh said on Twitter, “A big thank you to CM Yogi Adityanath Ji. I am highly thankful to you for the assurance of sanction of (INR) 48 Crore for the budget to build hostels for students of Uttar Pradesh in Delhi-NCR. It would be one major step towards accommodation.”
The promise of a new hostel brings relief to students even though the dates of construction and its unveiling remain unclear. Finding cheap accommodation on campus, or in Delhi is not easy for the regular DU student. With rising costs of commercial accomodations (Paying Guests), and limited number of seats in the hostel, students are left with no choice but to opt for private accommodation which usually burns a hole in their pocket. In some cases, students are also subjected to harassment by brokers and landlords.
The move sounds promising, as currently, the University hostels lack various facilities, and the number of seats remains low. The University also has a history of protests related to the hostels, with the recent ones being the Hindu College hostel and the Daulat Ram College hostel rows. This move also leaves one wondering if the implementation of the new hostel would mean a revision in the current hostel rules and guidelines.
On 17th May, three activists from the Students’ Federation of India (SFI) were allegedly attacked with lathis by unidentified men at the Faculty of Arts after they were protesting along with the St. Stephen’s College Staff Association. They blamed Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) for the attack.
Three SFI activists, who wish to remain anonymous, were allegedly attacked by goons when they were resting after a protest by the St. Stephen’s College Staff Association. One of the activists suffered head injuries.
An activist recalls the ordeal, “It was raining, suddenly almost five people with faces covered with handkerchief came and asked whether we were from SFI. When our answer was affirmative, they first abused us and then attacked us with the lathis they had with them.” He added that one of them tried to attack the female activist, but she was standing far away and started calling for help. “After seeing people coming towards us, the attackers fled.”
In the social media posts, SFI has blamed ABVP for the attack. “Yes, it can’t be proved, but it is obvious,” claims one of the activists. “They first identified us as members of SFI and then attacked us. It is a sheer display of their money and muscle power.”
A police complaint has been filed at the Maurice Nagar Police Station in lieu of the incident, however, the activists don’t have a lot of faith in the authorities either. “We were attacked after the Virgin Tree protests at Hindu College, we have been attacked at the Vishwavidyala metro station, we had photos, videos and even CCTV footage of the incident. Yet, the police failed to take action.”
Refuting allegations, Sidharth Yadav, Delhi State Secretary of ABVP denies allegations. “Time and again they come out with their own thought-out incidents followed by tagging ABVP as goons. It is an old tactic, but whatsoever it may be, it must be thoroughly inquired. The allegations must also be investigated and any perpetrator must also be caught.” He added that a police complaint is a must and if anything comes up in the investigation or any name from ABVP comes up, strict action should be taken. “But I don’t think that would be required, it is just their old style of propagating false news against us. Their previous allegations, too, have failed to furnish any material evidence, despite them beating our members at Hindu College and walking away scot-free.”
Feature Image Credits: Students’ Federation of India
The ABVP-led DUSU has formally requested the DU Vice Chancellor to not conduct the semester examinations a day prior and after, and on the day of the General Elections.
For the upcoming Lok Sabha elections of 2019, which will be coinciding with the April-May semester exams, the ABVP-led Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) has requested the Vice Chancellor of the University of Delhi, Professor Yogesh Tyagi, to not hold the semester examinations on the same day as that of the elections. They also demanded that the exams should neither be held a day prior, nor a day later than the actual date of casting votes, so as to ensure that the students from other states can exercise their right to vote as well. The external exams, along with the internal assessments, and practicals willl begin from April and are expected to continue till the first week of June.
In a separate letter addressed to the Chief Election Officer (CEO), Mr. Sunil Arora, DUSU requested him to arrange special railway services for the students of major Indian cities for their convenient travel, and to also make the tickets available at compensated rates. They also requested him to issue a directive in the form of an advisory to all the educational institutions in the country, urging them to not conduct the end-semester examinations during the ongoing General Elections.
“As students, a lot of us would be casting our first votes, as citizens of India we really look forward to it. A holiday prior the election and post it, would allow us to act our electoral choices,” says a second-year student of Kamla Nehru College.
These demands were raised, keeping in mind the fundamental right of the youth to vote, and the demand for the special railway services ensures that students from other states can also cast their votes in their respective constituencies. DUSU further appealed to the students to consciously exercise their fundamental right to vote in the upcoming elections.
However, some students have their doubts about this move as well and it, as articulated by another second-year student, “All the services are only available for the major Indian cities. I wouldn’t be able to go back anyway as I come from the remote town of Balangir in Orissa, it is a hectic two-day journey by train.”
The President of DUSU, Shakti Singh, stated in a press release, “The need of the hour is a strengthened democracy which can only be achieved by facilitating the maximum participation of the youths. We shall make every possible endeavour to effectively utilize our resources to meet these ends. We hope to see considerable growth in vote share in these elections.”
Saimon Farooqui, the all-India media and communications manager of NSUI, said, “A certain well thought-out mechanism needs to be established as voting is a layered process and students come from various parts of the country. They should also ensure that studies are not compromised in any way. It is the responsibility of the University of Delhi to ensure that voting process is smooth for students and they are able to exercise their right to vote.”
The Delhi University Students Union has publicly declared that the Vice Chancellor has repeatedly avoided meeting them and that they demand an immediate audience to discuss student’s welfare.
On the 5th of March, the ABVP led Delhi University Students Union organized a protest outside the Vice Chancellor’s office to bring to light the apparent absence of the Vice Chancellor and his unwillingness to discuss pertinent concerns of the students. The protest was led by Mr Shakti Singh( DUSU president) along with Ms. Jyoti Choudhary ( Joint Secretary, DUSU). It began outside the VC’s office and a group of close to 100 members of the ABVP marched towards Vishwavidyalaya metro station in an attempt to make their demands heard.
Majority of the protesters including the DUSU president Mr. Shakti Singh were arrested by the police to deescalate the tension and to prevent the crowd from turning violent. They were released shortly after. This protest comes directly after a protest held on the 18th of February expressing similar concerns.
Image credits: ABVP media cell
The DUSU has accused the Vice Chancellor, Prof. Yogesh Tyagi of ignoring student’s issues and refusing to meet the elected members of the Union. This protest comes after repeated attempts made by the union to meet him so the issues could be discussed. Ms. Jyoti Chaudhary informed that she and the President had sent numerous applications in their personal capacity and on behalf of the union over the span of six months requesting to meet the VC. There has allegedly been no response from the VC’s office which has significantly hindered the DUSU’s ability to solve matters of heightened importance for the student community.
Image credits: ABVP media cell
Four primary issues were presented during the protest which demanded the immediate attention of the VC. These were-
The introduction of supplementary exams so that graduating students who have failed can reappear for the exam without a period of two months without having to wait for another year.
New hostels should be constructed to satisfy the demand and the process of admission into the hostels should be centralized.
The fees for any post graduate course should be uniform across all colleges. For example- Hindu College and Shaheed Sukhdev College should charge the same fees for common courses.
Initiation of the Vice Chancellor’s scholarship for specially disabled students of Delhi University.
Mr. Shakti Singh said, “The Vice Chancellor should immediately end his dictatorial attitude and the fact that our attempts to discuss these important issues have been handled so carelessly by him is extremely unfortunate. We will continue the fight until and unless we receive an audience of the VC himself.”
Last year, a similar concern was raised by the former president of the DUSU Mr. Rocky Tuseed who towards the end of his term said that the Vice Chancellor actively ignored the DUSU and had taken out no time to discuss the concerns of the students with them.
On the other hand, the Vice President of the DUSU, Mr. Akash Chaudhary (NSUI) did not participate in the protest and claimed that “it is a publicity stunt where the same issues are raised year after year.” He also mentioned that he had met the Vice Chancellor on the 1st of November and had a discussion with him on issues such as “ICC elections in every college, provision of buses for female students, construction of sports facilities and proper grounds in all colleges.”
The President, Mr Singh also mentioned that “Owing to his health conditions, we have given him (VC) a period of 15 days to respond to our concerns. If we receive a negative response, we will be forced to hold a protest on a larger scale as the welfare of students is at stake.”
