BJP Archives - DU Beat - Delhi University's Independent Student Newspaper

Campus Central

LSR Protest Sparks Debate; Principal’s Statement, Students’ Reaction, and the Campus’s Apolitical Stance In Question

By DU Beat April 16, 2026

While protests at LSR continue for the removal of the Principal’s video featured on BJP’s official Instagram page, debates spark on institutional identity, political freedom, and the student’s right to dissent.

After the protests staged at LSR on the 15th of April over the Principal’s video on Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam being featured on the official Instagram page of the Bharatiya Janata Party came to an inconclusive end, the Principal, Dr. Kanika K. Ahuja issued an official statement to The Indian Express. She stated,

The views were shared in the video in an individual capacity. While I hold the office of the Principal, it is important to distinguish between personal intellectual engagement with a social subject and a formal institutional communique.”

Addressing the college’s reiterated commitment to maintaining the ‘apolitical’ stance, she said, “The college’s commitment to an apolitical environment refers to an absence of partisan affiliation not a detachment from critical social discourse.” She further addressed the alleged “saffronisation” on campus through selectively inviting speakers by adding,

The selection of speakers and the organisation of events are decentralised processes at LSR. These decisions are primarily driven by the respective student societies in consultation with their faculty advisors.”

These clarifications come in the wake of the student-led protest held on campus where students across departments and years organised sit-ins at the lower foyer—the immediate area outside the auditorium, adjacent to the Principal’s Office—along with the adjoining corridors, staircases, and outdoor spaces to raise concerns regarding the circulation of this video, which they believed to be in direct opposition to the college’s stated ‘apolitical’ stance that has been reiterated to close down exhibitions, refuse approval of speakers, and hinder free political expression on campus.

In a clarification issued by the students through a statement they refute accusations of being against the Women’s Reservation Bill. The statement published through an anonymous Instagram account reads, “Contrary to the disinformation at the moment—the students of LSR are not mobs protesting against the Women’s Reservation Bill which was talked about by Principal, Ms. Kanika K. Ahuja. The students are conducting a PEACE PROTEST at the moment against the hypocritical stance on apoliticality that our Principal uses to dismiss the girls when they attempt to talk about critical discourses, creative freedom…”. To the students of LSR who stress on their protest as peaceful—one that they reasserted with a floral arrangement reading “We Come in Peace” against the accusations of being a “mob” as asserted by a faculty member—their primary cause of dissent is the featuring of the Principal’s video where she is identified not in an individual capacity but as the Principal of Lady Shri Ram College on the official Instagram Page of BJP.

Image of the floral arranged shared by anonymous source.

While Ahuja reported to the Indian Express that, “I, staff advisors, faculty and others in the administration have remained in active dialogue with students to address campus concerns”, students report otherwise. During a brief interaction with students on the day of the protest, which multiple attendees reported as lasting less than fifteen minutes, Ahuja reportedly presented documents of communication and stated that the video was originally recorded for the Ministry of Women and Child Development but was uploaded by the BJP without her permission.

When asked if any actions had been taken to get the video removed, the students reported that no such action had been initiated, and that the Principal informed that gathering that she would “consider” sending an email for removal of the video. Similarly, on the second day of the sit-in, that is 16th April, she allegedly did not show up to the auditorium after her presence was requested by the protesting students, who complied with her initial request of an audience at the Auditorium instead of the Lower Foyer.

Following the protest on 15th April, which ended in the Principal walking-off in lieu of what she termed as “disrespect”, the administration of the college sent an email quoting a directive issued by the University of Delhi’s Proctor’s Office on March 23, 2026. The notice emphasised the need for prior approval from the concerned authorities for organising protests and demonstrations on the institution’s grounds. It further said that failing to comply with these requirements could result in disciplinary action, and asked students to follow the directive and continue attending classes.

Screenshot of Notification from LSR Administration.

Multiple students reported that the administration had been calling their guardians and parents to report their involvement in the protest, which they viewed as a clear violation of their rights. Additionally, the Students’ Union of Lady Shri Ram College of 2025-26 and 2026-27 issued a joint statement across liaison groups: they wrote,

We the Student Union of Lady Shri Ram College, wish to state unequivocally that we are not the organisers, convenors, or leaders of the protest currently taking place within the college premises…As elected representatives, our role is limited to facilitating communication and ensuring that the concerns of the students are conveyed appropriately to the relevant authorities.”

As news channels and social media pages continue a widespread reporting on the protest, the students of LSR involved in the sit-ins released a statement through the anonymous Instagram Page to “please represent the truth of our protest to the public so it doesn’t have the false narratives attached to it.” This request comes in light of multiple accounts on X accusing the protestors to be “Left-wing students (backed by terrorist org SFI) [who] not only made the Principal captive but also almost tried to lynch her and her daughter, just because she made a video supporting the women’s bill.”

Multiple such statements trying to relegate the protests to a political party have been actively refuted as the students’ demand remains the same—removal of the video, issuing a public clarification, avoiding external speakers on campus without proper background checks, ensuring all political engagements remain strictly non-partisan on campus, and ultimately reaffirming the institution’s commitment to secular and democratic values.

Multiple students have reported that during the first day of the protest, that is 15th March, a certain faculty member had been recording videos of the protesting students, many of whom were minors, without their consent. On informing the Principal regarding the same, including a case of alleged manhandling by the aforementioned Professor, the Principal reportedly stated that she would believe her colleague over the students in light of an adjacent incident which was brought up without the involved student’s consent. A deletion of such videos and photographs have been immediately demanded by the students, which the Principal reportedly agreed to.

Prominent public figures like Anish Gawande and Akhilesh Yadav have stepped up in support of the protesting students of Lady Shri Ram College; the former wrote on his Instagram story, “Very important clarification. You cannot demand that the students remain apolitical while the administration toes a political line.”

Screenshot of Anish Gawande’s Instagram Story

A student in conversation with DU Beat said,

We’re fighting to protect the ethos of our institution. What we’re seeing right now is a spread of convenient misinformation led by the principal, which is shaping a narrative against her own community, against her own students. That is unacceptable.”

This protest against the actions of Dr. Ahuja is however not the first incident of outrage by the student body of Lady Shri Ram College, but follows the sexist and Islamophobic comments passed by ex-diplomat Deepak Vohra in the presence of the Principal during an event organised within the college.

However, while the outrage continues, it is to be noted that while the online community of students supporting the protest remains at large numbers of 1000+ across multiple channels, on-campus limited students have actively engaged in the sit-ins. At the same time, student responses have been mixed; while a section of the students are concerned about institutional consistency and the larger implications of the Principal’s involvement on a particular party’s platform, others wholeheartedly welcome her stance. They emphasise an individual’s right to participate in public affairs, especially those involving women’s representation; a LinkedIn user from LSR writes,

“At the end of the day, she is not only our Principal but also an individual entitled to her own thoughts and opinions, just as each of us.”

On this, Principal Ahuja reported to Times Now, “Roughly 175 students participated in the protest out of around 4000 enrolled on campus. They do not represent the majority.” The separation of the personal from the political has at large remained the cause of support towards the Principal’s video, which claims to remain stationed only upon the Bill, and not upon the political party.

These recent developments across Delhi University and in particular within LSR, with respect to the conversations between the students and the administration during times of dissent, which remain inconclusive, point to a larger question of autonomy, authority, and hierarchy within college spaces, particularly on colleges that allege to be ‘apolitical’ but in practice remain otherwise. If to be or not to be [political] is the question, then the shaping of this incident, especially for a campus like LSR which has a long-standing history of intellectual inquiry, student engagement, and expression of free speech, shall determine the long-term implications of how college spaces are reconstructed, for both the students and the administrators.

Image Credit: Anonymous Source

DU Beat

Keep Reading

Campus Central

LSR Students React to the Principal’s Statement on BJP’s Official Instagram Page

By DU Beat April 13, 2026

LSR Principal, Kanika K. Ahuja faces extreme backlash from the students after her statement on Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam gets featured on BJP’s Official Instagram Handle.

On the 13th of April, the Bharatiya Janata Party posted on their official Instagram Page a series of reactions praising the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, that is, the Women’s Reservation Bill. Amongst those featured was the Principal of Lady Shri Ram College for Women, Dr. Kanika K. Ahuja.

In the video she addresses the Women’s Reservation Bill calling it “a constitutional course correction.” She goes on to say that the bill “reflects the shift from women’s development to women’s led development” and remains hopeful for the prospects it shall bring to the “women leaders” graduating from LSR. What appears as an ordinary video however, received raging reactions from the student community of LSR, including current students and alumni who expressed grave concerns over the college’s state of affairs.

The comment section of her video—what appears at first glance to have been recorded not at an official event, but exclusively for posting on BJP’s Page—has been exploding with comments from students across colleges, especially LSR bashing the Principal for her statement. One comment reads,

Women empowerment—yes sure. When we were not given a chance to raise our voices. When we were not allowed to make societies. When we were not allowed to invite some ‘specific speakers’ because we are APOLITICAL?”

Another comment reads, “Political neutrality in the rulebook of the Union and political endorsements in the feed. Interesting.”

The most common point of criticism that is presented by the students through their sarcastic remarks in the comments section remains against the ‘apolitical stance’ of Lady Shri Ram College, one that has repeatedly been reasserted, especially by the current Principal as reported by multiple students. Recently, an exhibition held by a society of LSR during the annual fest, Tarang 2026, was shut down after being taken out of context, due to its criticism of power hierarchy and certain political figures. Reportedly the Principal responded to the closure saying, “You need to understand that we as a government college can not side with or make any political statements.”

Similar incidents have sparked over the past year when certain performing societies were made to change their performance scripts to avoid “controversy” and maintain an apolitical stance, along with the Diwali festival of LSR’s NSS, titled ‘Noor’ for as long as students can remember, being changed to ‘Varshik Samaroh Diwas’.

The Deepak Vohra controversy last year, LSR’s non-affiliation with DUSU, and the college’s refusal to let Nivedita Menon, an ex-faculty member and an alumni of LSR, enter campus due to invitation by the non-affiliated LSR SFI was further pointed out by students who remain outraged by the Principal’s recording a video for BJP’s page. One comment writes,

Same college that did not allow Nivedita Menon’s session to happen btw on the pretext that it was organised by a non-affiliated organisation. Is LSR affiliated with the beejaypee now?”

A graduate from LSR, assumingly familiar Dr. Kanika K. Ahuja as a professor, before she became the Principal writes, “From preaching in psych classes about non-partisanship, emancipation, and what not to this.” An anonymously-led Instagram Page of LSR called for a protest in lieu of the same on the 15th of April.

However, while a majority of students continue to express their concerns and outrage over the impact of this video across Instagram, X, and Whatsapp, some students share their solidarity with their Principal. One comment writes, “Funny how every second comment here is trying to define ‘apolitical’. Reality? No one cares. The institution stands strong anyway. And we welcome the bill and ma’am’s stand.”

A similar sentiment was expressed by a fellow student on her Instagram story,

She’s speaking in women’s favour still getting hate cuz political parties matters more than women empowerment. Even I’m not a particular pol party supporter anymore but we should actually praise her for raising her voice on women’s empowerment rather than hating on her.”

What remains the larger question behind this outrage versus sympathy is the truth of being an apolitical college, especially an apolitical ‘women’s’ college in the 21st Century, within the space of Delhi University, and at large India. What consequences does this tag of ‘apolitical’ bear, not just upon the students, but the faculty and the administration, and what is the way forward to prevent as an alumni writes, “an institution undoing its own historical legacy”?

Image Credits: Vanya for DU Beat

Anonymous

Keep Reading

Features

To Free or Not to Free?

By DU Beat February 3, 2025

A distortion of democracy? A betrayal of a social contract? A passive receipt of benefits or an active political participation towards a welfare state?

The language of democratic exercise often employs, not merely as its endorsers but also its practitioners, various sweet shop owners who incentivize capital-based campaigning. The Delhi state elections are a display of such a state of war, which has as its highlights, the various monetary biddings made over very selective and political demographics.

It is not unknown that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), in its manifesto, has promised a sum of INR 2100 to women under the aegis of the ‘Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojna’. The certainty of this scheme is contingent on the party securing a majority. However, a serious delirium of such schemes is the incompetent and biased nature of such claims. While it is true that a welfare state works for its marginalized citizens, the composition of Delhi and its voters demands serious scrutiny. The marginalized of the capital are an extremely heterogeneous group, and certainly, when a distinction is made in the category of women by the state, the exclusion of migrant and transgender women disallows any serious engagement towards actual welfare.

Nitara, a transgender woman and a student of Delhi University told DU Beat:

There are about four to five thousand registered trans voters in Delhi, the official number of which I believe to be much higher. Women are promised INR 2100 in monetary assistance by AAP, following which the Congress and BJP have promised INR 2500. While it’s good they do it, why don’t trans women get similar aid? Don’t we deserve it? In fact, a trans woman is more vulnerable than a cis woman is. This is the bare minimum we can be provided with. We are not promised incentives because our numbers are low. Nobody wins elections with 2-3 thousand votes. Delhi Vidhan Sabha elections tell you that you’ll only be cared for if you are a big vote bank, else nobody is with you.”

Nitara’s statement underscores the transactional nature of electoral promises where welfare is not a matter of rights but of electoral arithmetic. The exclusion of transgender women from such schemes reveals the shallow inclusivity of political manifestos, which are tailored to appease large vote banks rather than address the systemic vulnerabilities of marginalized communities. This is not merely an oversight but a deliberate strategy to prioritize electoral gains over equitable welfare. The Delhi elections, in this regard, are a microcosm of a larger national trend where democracy is reduced to a marketplace of freebies, and voters are treated as consumers rather than citizens.

With the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct, a partial hiatus has been put to the mockery of democracy and development. However, desperate attempts to milk out this inconsistent idea have not stopped. AAP, for instance, has included a ‘Pujari-Granthi Samman Yojana’ for temple and gurudwara priests. Arvind Kejriwal, the National Convener of AAP explained the scheme in a Economic Times report,

Pujaris and granthis are an important part of our society, but they are often a neglected section. For the first time in the country, we are introducing a scheme to support them, under which they will receive a monthly allowance of INR 18,000.”

This circles back to questioning the intentionality of such a culture of voting. Lest it be taken as a pitting of one religion against the other, it is a certain fact that other religious minorities such as the Muslims and Christians undergo neglect and invisibility at much deeper scales but any affirming reality escapes them during election season. The culture of freebies, while seemingly beneficial on the surface, is a hollowing democratic practice that undermines the very essence of governance. Political parties, in their bid to outdo each other, have turned welfare into a competitive sport where the highest bidder wins. For instance, in the 2021 Tamil Nadu elections, the DMK and AIADMK engaged in a bidding war, promising everything from free laptops to cash transfers, with little regard for the fiscal sustainability of such schemes. Moreover, the freebie culture perpetuates a dependency syndrome among voters, where electoral choices are driven by immediate monetary gains rather than informed deliberation on policies and governance. This undermines the democratic ideal of an engaged and informed citizenry, reducing elections to a transactional exchange of votes for cash or goods.

The critique of freebie culture is not a dismissal of welfare schemes but a call for their rationalization and equitable implementation. Welfare measures must be designed to address structural inequalities and empower marginalized communities, rather than serve as tools for electoral manipulation. For instance, schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) have been lauded for their focus on creating sustainable livelihoods rather than doling out cash handouts. While the hollowing of democratic ideals is saddening, it is not very different from what we as participants are used to believing as development at all times. This makes one question if a democratic ideal is but a sweet shop economy?

Featured Image Credit: Sourav Rai for Indian Express

Bhavana Bhaskar

[email protected]

Keep Reading

Campus Central

DU Vice Chancellor faces heavy backlash following his endorsement of ‘Modi vs Khan Market Gang’

By DU Beat January 19, 2025

Delhi University Vice Chancellor, Yogesh Singh, faced heavy criticism from faculty members on 16 January, 2025, Thursday, after he endorsed Ashok Srivastava’s ‘Modi vs Khan Market Gang.’

On 16 January, 2025, Delhi University Vice Chancellor, Yogesh Singh, appeared to endorse the Bharatiya Janata Party ahead of the Delhi election scheduled for February. The endorsement came at a book launch held at the Convention Hall of the Vice Chancellor’s office, organised by the Council of Media and Public Policy and Research along with the Silence Foundation in collaboration with Delhi University. The book titled ‘Modi vs Khan Market Gang’ has been authored by Ashok Shrivastava, a news anchor for the state-sponsored public broadcaster, DD News.

Khan Market Gang was notably a strategic attempt to take digs at the opposition in the lead-up to the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. It was in response to the opposition parading “Chowkidar Chor hai” at the incumbency at the time. Khan Market, a double-storey complex amidst bungalows that pay host to lawmakers and civil servants, is often considered the most expensive retail area in India. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who doesn’t shy away from letting people know about his humble beginnings, uses this as a political binary against the elites of the Indian socio-political system.

The main objective of the book, according to Srivastava, was to make people in academia aware of the fake narratives that have been thrown around during the incumbent’s tenure. As has been a recurring theme of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) attempts to deal with critics, Prime Minister Narendra Modi once again was talked about synonymously with India at the event. Those who weren’t uncritical of the government, both the journalists and notably institutes abroad, were called out and mocked subsequently.

Sweden, smaller than most Indian states, decided to establish V-Dem several years ago and deemed India undemocratic ahead of both the 2019 and the 2024 elections. A nation as small as that critiquing us makes sense when you look at the people funding it,”

said Yogesh Singh whilst talking about the various anecdotes Srivastava had used in his book to prove how the “Khan Market Gang” transcends borders and nationalities.

Singh didn’t shy away from his allegiances at a time when the model of conduct was placed in the state. He suggested that the Indians enjoy unprecedented freedom and that the global rankings and indexes are all part of a broader narrative against the prime minister and thus India. India curiously ranks 159 out of 189 countries in the latest edition of the Press Freedom Index. His statement comes at a time when central universities have never been more politicised. The changes brought forth by the National Education Policy (NEP), in the curriculums and the regular seminars and events in colleges that align with the ideological tilts of the government, reflect a growing trend of educational spaces turning into arenas for parroting the broader narrative set forth by the ruling party and a slow departure from the intelligentsia.

The event was attended by the members of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidhyarthi Parishad, the youth wing of the BJP, who have themselves been in hot water following the incident where they were seen assaulting students in Ramjas College. Several high-profile BJP leaders were also present at the event where Yogesh Singh was described as the “Chief Organiser” by Ashok Srivastava.

Several Delhi University faculty members condemned the book launch at a time when the model of conduct was in force in Delhi.

Abha Dev Habib, an assistant professor at Miranda House, deemed the event “a political misuse of a publicly funded university” in a conversation with The Print.

I am amazed to find that in a premier public-funded university, where scores of faculty members routinely publish their work on a myriad of issues, including publications in support of the current ruling regime’s policies or critical of the ruling establishment, the university administration has decided to privilege a publication like that of Mr. Ashok Shrivastav, who is an outsider to the university,”

said Maya John, an assistant professor at Jesus and Mary College, in an email to the vice-chancellor.

Prakash Singh, part of both the organisation team and DU’s South campus director, denied that the event was linked to DU and that DU had simply received a “request” for the use of its space for the event, despite Srivastava deeming Singh the “Chief Organiser” of the event.

Featured Images Credits: @UnivofDelhi on X

Yash Raj

[email protected]

Keep Reading

Features

Yeh Kya Hua, Kaise Hua: Dissecting the Congress’ Lapsus Regnī

By DU Beat October 16, 2024

Baffling exit polls and puncturing the Congress complacency, the BJP has battled anti-incumbency to secure its third term in Haryana. An inordinate number of dissidents, glaring portents for division within the party’s central leadership, a failure to foreground fresh faces and an unsubstantiated socialist rhetoric, inter alia, have come together to form, what seems to have been an insurmountable impediment for the Congress. Maharashtra and Jharkhand no longer appear as welcoming.

The Congress has thus far failed to diagnose the rot in its strategy. Its narratives involute upon themselves, constantly miscarrying with the public, and its parroting of the same old defeated stratagems now heads ad nauseam. The Haryana defeat carries with itself considerable ignominy for the Congress which has been smug in its prophecies of victory before and the natural course of the ensuing result has been invariably failure. While Congress president Kharge denies that the Maharashtra assembly elections shall be affected by the defeat, the BJP and its allies remain confident that the ruling Mahayuti in Maharashtra has been only further strengthened. It is implausible that the long-enduring, anti-incumbency temperament shall so suddenly flip, which leaves room to investigate what the BJP has done right during the campaigns and on-ground.

Primarily, a deluge of rebel candidates have fractured the Congress’ vote bank, drawing from it a generous amount it could have used against BJP. The INC lost 16 seats to rebels and independents, severely weakening it against the BJP’s far more structured and organisationally sound ticket management, particularly after UP in the Lok Sabha elections.

The following table illustrates the Congress’ losses to dissidents:

Kalka	Congress lost by a margin of 11k votes (Rebel got 32k votes)
Pundri	Congress came 3rd; Congress rebel got 40k votes and lost by 2k.
Rai	Lost by a margin of 4.5k votes (Rebel got 12k votes)
Gohana	Lost by a margin of 10k votes (Rebel got 15k votes)
Safidon	Lost by a margin of 4k votes (Rebel got 29k votes)
Dadri	Lost by a margin of 2k votes (Rebel got 6k votes)
Tigaon	Congress came 3rd; Congress rebel got 57k votes and lost by 37k votes.
Ambala Cantt.	Congress came 3rd; Congress rebel got 53k votes and lost by 7k votes.
Assandh	Lost by a margin of 2k votes (Rebel got 16k votes)
Uchana Kalan	Lost by 39 votes (Rebel got 32k votes)
Bhadra	Lost by a margin of 7.5k votes (Rebel got 27k votes)
Mahendragarh	Lost by a margin of 2k votes (Rebel got 21k votes)
Sohna	Lost by a margin of 11k votes (Rebel got 70k votes)
Ballabgarh	Congress came 4th; Congress rebel came 2nd, receiving 44k votes and lost by 17k votes.
Dabwali	Lost by a margin of 610 votes (Rebel got 2k votes)
Rania	Lost by a margin of 4k votes (Rebel got 36k votes)
Bahadurgarh	Congress rebel won the seat as an independent; Congress candidate came 3rd.

Further, the Congress made no attempts to restructure its leadership. The young faces—Selja in Haryana and Sachin Pilot in Rajasthan—were conceded to the older ones, of Hooda and Gehlot respectively. The pattern makes itself manifest with an octogenarian as the party president. The BJP, on the other hand, deployed 60 fresh faces to stand against the ancient heavyweights, albeit losing ones, of the Congress. The Congress renominated 17 of its stale candidacies that had lost in the past. The 2023 state election Telangana win for the Congress, supplanting the previously incumbent Bharatia Rashtra Samiti, came in only after they took a chance with a new face – Revanth Reddy’s.

Congress also almost consciously defined itself as a ‘one-caste party’. The Congress’ overdependence on the Jat population proved to be a fatal oversight. The BJP conquered the Congress’ meek share by consolidating the 75 percent of the non-Jat population. Congress’ implicit preference for Hooda to Selja handed to the BJP critical accusatory ammunition, allowing them to charge the Congress with anti-Dalit sentiments and a neglect for the non-Jat population. Even the Jat votes, that the Congress hoped to completely own, had to be shared with INLD, further increasing BJP’s uncontested share of the non-Jat votes.

Despite the Congress’ efforts to appeal to the OBC demographic, comprising 40 per cent of Haryana’s population, BJP’s Saini clearly won the affection of the masses. Ajay Singh Yadav, chairman of the AICC OBC Congress, himself confessed to the Congress’ disregard for the OBC belt in Haryana. The CSDS-Lokniti survey reports the strength of the OBC population in favour of the BJP. The OBC support flourished after Saini replaced Khattar as chief minister. The BJP managed to assimilate into its supporter base a “rainbow coalition” of Brahmins, Punjabi Khatris, non-Jatavs, Yadavs and SCs. The “Lakhpati Drone Ladies” project engendered a massively positive reception of the BJP’s attempts to “elevate the SCs to general status”, in the words of an ITI student from Ambala.

The Gandhi siblings campaigned with much pomp, but rather late. The BJP’s strategy had been to counter the anti-incumbency silently and aggressively. The Congress’ work assumed tangibility too late, and in that they have not defeated the image, one needing much redressal, of the relative passivity of the party and the unattractive languor in its reactions. RaGa’s flimsy socialist narrative did not help their case with the upwardly-mobile social classes as well as the urban votes.

Analysing Congress’ trends, juxtaposed with those of the BJP, it remains a matter of irrefutable truth that the ability of the BJP to counter is what keeps its power from waning. Given the BJP’s untarnished dominance, only in terms of its claims to power and occupation of office, it is peculiar that the Congress keeps succumbing to its flippant confidence in its, in all honesty, paltry chances to overthrow the Saffron Goliath. What blights this torpid David and wherefore does he hibernate? One cannot help but nod in terror as they ponder the truth of Modi’s tirades when he warns of the “chaos” that a Congress government shall bring.

Featured Image Credits: PTI

Aayudh Pramanik

[email protected]

Keep Reading

DUB Speak

Reclaiming Jurisdiction or Reinventing Control

By DU Beat September 12, 2023

Key bills were passed in the parliament and postponed to the winter session amid turmoil, disagreements, outrage regarding Manipur violence, walkouts, a failed no-confidence motion, and a flying kiss controversy. While numerous controversial bills have been approved or introduced under the banner of “decolonizing India’s judiciary,” many political analysts argue that these bills are nothing more than a means of gaining influence over the legislature and the law.

The Monsoon session of Parliament, which began on July 20, 2023, ended on August 11, 2023, amid chaos, debates, outrage over Manipur violence, and drama over a no-confidence motion. This monsoon session had the largest number of bills passed yet the lowest amount of productive hours. 14 of the 23 bills passed this session were approved in 22 hours of discussion. With certain bills adopted minutes into discussion, the legitimacy and democratic significance of the two houses come into doubt.

According to PRS Legislative Research, despite the fact that parliament only met for half of its designated period, this session had a high level of legislative activity. 56% of the bills introduced in the session were passed by both houses. During the session, the Lok Sabha functioned for 43% of its scheduled time, while the Rajya Sabha functioned for 55%. Here is a tabular representation of a few bills passed in the session as per the report by PRS Legislative Research:

Bills passed	Lok Sabha		Rajya Sabha
Bills passed	Time spent on discussion	Members participated	Time spent on discussion	Members participated
The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi(Amendment) Bill, 2023	4 hrs 54 mins	26	8 hrs 3 mins	32
The Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2023	56 mins	8	1 hr 9 mins	6
The Forest(Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023	38 mins	4	1 hr 41 mins	11
The Mines and Minerals(Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2023	19 mins	2	1 hr 34 mins	11
The Central Goods and Service Tax(Amendment) Bill, 2023	2 mins	0	3 mins	0
The Integrated Goods and Services Tax(Amendment) Bill, 2023	2 mins	0	3 mins	0

Here is a detailed analysis of some of the most controversial bills:

The Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Bill, 2023: On May 11, 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Delhi government in Delhi Government vs. Centre, granting it power over most services in the capital city, excluding public order, land, and police problems. According to the Supreme Court, Article 239A establishes a legislative assembly for the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The Delhi electorate chooses the members of the legislative assembly. Art. 239A must be interpreted in order to further representative democracy.

If a democratically elected government is not given the power to control the officers, the principle of the triple chain of accountability will be redundant.”

– CJI DY Chandrachud

However, on May 19, the centre issued an ordinance to overturn the decision of the Supreme Court. To replace the ordinance, the Delhi Service Bill was introduced. The law gives the Central Government the authority to create regulations governing the affairs of the Delhi Government, including the functions, terms, and other conditions of service of officials and employees. The new measure also creates the National Capital Civil Services Authority (NCCSA), which would make recommendations to the LG on transfers, postings, and disciplinary issues. The bill also grants the LG (indirectly the central government) vast powers over the calling, promulgation, and dissolution of the Delhi Legislative Assembly, as well as the appointment of the Chief Minister and other ministries.

The bill was approved by both houses of parliament. After the bill was passed in the Lok Sabha, the opposition walked out. The opposition questioned the prime minister’s vow to grant Delhi full autonomy.

Repeatedly, the BJP has promised that it will give full statehood to Delhi. In 2014, Modi himself said that upon becoming Prime Minister, he would give full statehood to Delhi. But today, these people stabbed the people of Delhi in the back. Don’t believe anything about Modi ji from now on.”

– Arvind Kejriwal tweeted

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023: On August 11, the Home Minister, Amit Shah, proposed three bills to replace the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPc), and the Evidence Act. These bills were proposed as part of an effort to decolonize the Indian judiciary.

As many as 313 changes have been proposed in the three criminal laws, and the objective is to ensure that people who approach the courts get justice within three years. The laws that are being replaced were essentially aimed at safeguarding the continuation of the British administration, and their objective was to punish, not deliver justice. The new laws will safeguard constitutional rights and deliver justice. These laws will be imbibed with the Indian soul.”

– Amit Shah, Home Minister

The three bills were sent to the standing committee, which is instructed to deliver a report before the winter session begins. The administration intends to enact and execute these bills before the end of the year. The full evaluation of these three bills paints a quite different picture from the one painted by the home minister in the house. The Indian Express writes:

There is a disjunct between the manner in which these bills are being presented and their actual content. They are far from being an overhaul that will be the panacea for issues that plague India’s criminal justice system. Large parts of these three bills simply reproduce existing provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, and the Indian Evidence Act.”

The lack of public participation, the complete repeal and revocation of certain sections, and the introduction of such comprehensive changes in a relatively short period of time are some of the major practical concerns about the sudden replacement of the legal system, which can lead to disruption in the legal system. According to political analysts, these bills represent an indirect legalisation of the regime’s violations of human rights. Here is a tabular depiction of some sections of the bills and their relationship to the ruling party’s current demonstration of human rights violations.

Extension of Detention Period	Extension of the detention period without any charges from the current duration to 90 days	Many news reports and declarations by human rights organisations expressed concern over the unlawful arrest and incarceration of many anti-CAA activists during the Delhi Riots of 2020. Various court statements addressed this serious issue. “These defenders, many of them students, appear to have been arrested simply because they exercised their right to denounce and protest against the CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act), and their arrest seems clearly designed to send a chilling message to India’s vibrant civil society that criticism of government policies will not be tolerated.” : UN Experts
Discretionary Powers for Law Enforcement	Discretionary powers, such as the ‘right to handcuff,’ to law enforcement officers raise ethical and practical concerns.	According to The Swaddle’s 2022 report, at least 4484 people died in police custody in the last two years. From the attack on Jamia Millia Islamia students in Delhi to the use of pellet guns and smoke bombs on farmers, India has seen an increase in police violence. The new law gives police authority rather than control, raising fears about police violence and reducing the legal ability to demand accountability.
Gendered Provisions	New Rape law applies specifically to women	This law not only advocates heteronormativity but also toxic masculinity and makes it more difficult for male victims of sexual assault to come forward and report their abuse. The transgender population is one of the most vulnerable to such laws. The government’s queerphobic behaviour and implementation of the trans bill in 2019, despite enormous community protests, raises a larger concern about governments’ stance on trans issues.
Impact on minority rights	Provisions on “Love Jihad”	Several international and national human rights organisations have questioned the Love Jihad law and how it is being used against Muslims. With examples of Hindu vigilantes collaborating with police and mob lynchings of Muslims under the name of love jihad on the rise. Providing full legal status raises serious concerns about the safety of minorities in the country.

Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service, and Term of Office) Bill, 2023: On August 10, 2023, the BJP government introduced this bill in the Rajya Sabha in an effort to alter the current method of appointment of election commission officers. This bill will take power away from the CJI and give the ruling party enormous influence in appointing the EC. The Wire reports:

Section 7 of this new Bill seeks to set up a selection committee headed by the prime minister, which will have one Union minister, nominated by the prime minister, and the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) as its members. Neither the Chief Justice of India nor any eminent jurist will find a place on this committee. This means that the chief election commissioner (CEC) and other election commissioners (ECs) would be selected by the political executive belonging to the ruling party, with the LoP either ignored or overruled. What kind of ‘neutrality and independence’ can be expected from such appointees?”

This bill will give the ruling party enormous authority over the Election Commission, raising concerns about the transparency and credibility of the world’s largest democratic elections.

Some of the other bills include:

Forest Conservation(Amendment) Bill, 2023 which allows non-forest activities on forest lands and permits clearance of forest within 100kms of national border.
Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2023 which will hold accountable private entities that are in the business of leveraging people’s data in order to further their agenda or make profit, though it also provides leeway for the government to work its way out despite large-scale surveillance.
The Mines and Minerals(Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2023 allows the private sector to mine 6 out of 12 atomic minerals. It also empowers the central government to exclusively auction mining leases and composite licences for certain critical minerals.

Many other bills were introduced and passed, including the Cinematography (Amendment) Bill, Pharmacy (Amendment) Bill, Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order (Amendment) Bill, and others. To read a detailed overview of all bills passed, here is the detailed article by IndiaToday.

Every year, multiple bills are passed, introduced, and rejected throughout the three sessions of parliament. The most crucial aspect, however, is the procedure through which bills are passed. With more bills approved in such a short period of time, without enough debate, question rounds, proper involvement of the opposition, or ignoring questions by taking advantage of other issues, the legitimacy of legislative or judicial reforms comes into doubt. With the declining state of democracy and the regime’s increasing attacks on minorities through a translucent lens, the introduction of new bills raises the question of whether these bills are introduced to bring reform or fill gaps in the existing system, or are simply a way to gain control over the major democratic bodies with power, a path towards fascism in India?

Feature Image Credits: Newslaundry

Dhruv Bhati

[email protected]

Keep Reading

Arts & Culture

Bullied, Bought, and Berated: The State of Opposition on Popular Demand

By DU Beat May 17, 2020

The current status of opposition in our country is extremely feeble, and it’s not a healthy sign for a democracy.

If not Modi, then who? This rhetoric, which doesn’t even qualify being called a question, is suggestive of a weak state of opposition in our country, which makes people elect terror accused and hate mongers for the sake of one person. However, this question was asked after the strategies aimed to weaken the opposition were set in motion which were relatively easier, owing to their lack of competency in the first place. But what made them touch a new low and cease their existence as an alternative altogether?

With a heavy PR marketing and ever famous IT cell, the propaganda was diluted very subtly. With huge corporate backups and resources, the opposition fell short drastically. A lack of better leadership and money as compared to the ruling party sowed seeds for cynicism against opposition. Very strategically accountability was shifted to opposition, everything started to go back to Nehru and Gandhi, and lost in this never-ending process were actual public concerns. Things were such that allegations were ensued of buying of opposition leaders in Karnataka. It’s shameful that the representatives of dissidents are thrashed so blatantly that dissidents would not want to associate themselves with such an embarrassment.

People might think why a popularly elected government with a heavy majority is problematic? Why is the opposition displeased with the works of the government aimed at national interest? Why do people speak ill of the ruling party? Well to answer that, we have to understand that democracy is not confined to a majority opinion. It’s inclusive of all the opinions by all of the people. If there’s representation of just one kind of view, it’s not sufficient. In a democracy we need to have counter opinions, checks and balances, and so far the onus of this was on opposition which has failed us and also been constructed to fail us, that we are now sinking.

Such a bereftness led to students, activists, satirists, and artists composing a voice of dissent as opposition. Although their cause is helpful for maintaining some counter opinions thus saving us from a site of an all majoritarian crisis, unless it’s not on the political grounds as oppositions, it would do no good.

A very basic definition of democracy taught us that it is of the people, by the people, and for the people. It’s time we see who these people are. Can you see yourself or can you see only yourself getting a representation?

Featured image credits: News 18

Umaima Khanam

[email protected]

Keep Reading

Arts & Culture

Manipulation of Historical Facts in the Political Realm

By DU Beat March 29, 2020

Looking at recent election campaigns, and the political climate of the country in general, several things come to light, one of them being the twisting of historical facts.

In his novel 1984, Orwell says, “Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”

Speaking at the Banaras Hindu University, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said, “Putting together our history, embellishing it and rewriting it is the responsibility of the country, its people and historians.”

Of course, efforts to do this have been underway for a few years now-during its first tenure, the culture ministry under the BJP Government set up a fourteen-member committee to present a report that will help the government rewrite certain aspects of Indian History, to prove that Hindu scriptures are not myths and that today’s Hindus descend directly from India’s first inhabitants from thousands of years ago.

India, unfortunately, is no stranger to such practices. Read Indian school textbooks, and you’ll see omissions of history from the dark days of Indira Gandhi’s tenure as Prime Minister. In textbooks from Rajasthan, you’ll see a watered-down version of Ambedkar’s fight against the oppressive caste system, where instead of representing him accurately as a vehement opponent of the caste system ingrained into the then prevalent structure of Hinduism, he is portrayed as a “Hindu Social Reformer” akin to the likes of Dayanand Saraswati and K B Hedgewar, the founder of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Nehru said that Mahmud Ghazni was a lover of art (the same Mahmud Ghazni who destroyed idols and temples in India). Gandhi is praised and hailed as a reformer and father of the nation but nowhere do we mention his obsession with the caste system

This cherry-picking of facts is incredibly problematic. It is the job of historians to present facts as they are, good or bad. However, politics is a different game altogether, and when contentions in History come into the political realm, things get ugly. Integrity is a crucial part of historical method, except no compulsion is there on politicians to be morally prudent.

When politicians are allowed to twist facts in order to pursue a particular narrative, they not only change what people think happened in the past. The key to the future lies in revisiting history, thus, history becomes an incredibly powerful tool to influence people’s emotions and actions.

Coming back to the status quo, that is exactly what the current government is doing. Historian Romila Thapar says “if the Hindus are to have primacy as citizens in a Hindu Rashtra (kingdom), their foundational religion cannot be an imported one.” It aims to revisit history in a manner where it establishes the current Hindu majority as indigenous. That, of course, comes at a cost, which here are the core values that make India what it is. That is precisely why it’s best to ensure that History is left outside of the political realm. It is far too dangerous a tool to be left in the hands of people like politicians, who’re guided by principles that primarily benefit themselves.
Image Credits: India TV

Khush Vardhan Dembla

[email protected]

Keep Reading

DUB News

NSUI Protest Against Violence in Delhi

By DUBeat February 27, 2020

Members of National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) Delhi protested against the violence instigated in Delhi outside Delhi Lieutenant Governor Anil Baijal’s residence.

On Tuesday, 25th February 2020, members of National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) Delhi protested against the violence instigated outside Delhi Lieutenant Governor Anil Baijal’s residence. Also, NSUI members raised slogans against Delhi violence at Lieutenant Governor’s residence in the wee hours of morning, around 1:30 a.m. Following this, NSUI members were detained by Delhi Police, as per the Press Release released by them on the same day.

NSUI activists organised a peace march to protest against Delhi violence from Delhi University Student Union (DUSU) office at Faculty of Arts, North Campus. Delhi University students joined NSUI activists and participated in the peace march by holding the statue of Mahatma Gandhi in hand.

Ashish Lamba , Secretary of Delhi University Student Union (DUSU) from NSUI said, “The NSUI activists protested at Lieutenant Governor’s house in Civil Lines regarding the violence which took place in Delhi and the Lieutenant Governor still did not respond and kept himself as a mute spectator. We were detained at Civil Lines Police Station. In the evening NSUI led DUSU also took out a Shanti candle march from DUSU office to Arts Faculty in order to appeal for peace.”

NSUI members stated, “It is a pre-planned conspiracy by BJP leaders. This violence and atrocities against minorities and Dalits has been raised and now we can see the riots on minorities and Dalits. NSUI will keep its fight against such violence and will spread Mahatma Gandhi ‘s Ahimsa Marg among the people of India.” NSUI demanded Home Minister Amit Shah’s resignation and asked him to step down from the ministry.

Feature Image Credits: DU Beat

Paridhi Puri

[email protected]

Keep Reading

Delhi Assembly Elections

The New Delhi Constituency: Standing Against the Current Chief Minister

By DU Beat February 8, 2020

With the Delhi Assembly elections today, let’s take a look at the candidates competing against incumbent Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) Chief Ministerial candidate- Arvind Kejriwal.

Arvind Kejriwal, Delhi’s Incumbent Chief Minister, is once again the chief ministerial candidate from Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) contesting from the New Delhi constituency. The New Delhi constituency was created by the delimitation commission in 2008. Historically, it has always been the constituency, which has been held by the Chief Ministers, as Sheila Dixit represented the constituency in the 2008 Elections before Kejriwal. The New Delhi Constituency has a sizeable population of Government employees and falls in the posh localities of Delhi.

With neither Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), nor the Indian National Congress (INC), releasing the names of their chief ministerial candidates, let’s take a look at the candidates competing from the New Delhi Constituency.

Sunil Yadav (BJP)

Sunil Yadav is an advocate by profession. Yadav started his political career as a Party’s Yuva Morcha. He currently holds the President’s Office of Yuva Morcha, Bharatiya Janata Party, Delhi (BJYM Delhi). He is the former Secretary of the Delhi unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party. While it was rumoured for him to get a ticket in the 2013 and 2015 Elections, this is Yadav’s first time contesting as a candidate.

Talking about the focus on national issues in the BJP manifesto over local issues, Sunil Yadav, said to theIndian Express, that he was fighting the election on local agenda. “I am talking about people living in clusters in my constituency. I am talking about their water and electricity bills.” He also claims, he is confident of a victory with a margin of 25,000 votes.

Romesh Sabharwal (INC)

Romesh Sabharwal is a former Student Leader, who has been associated with the National Students’ Union of India (NSUI), and the Youth Congress three decades back. He was the President of NSUI Delhi State. This is Sabharwal’s first time contesting as a candidate.

He also claims that he is confident to beat Arvind Kejriwal. “He may be the CM of Delhi, but I am a local, as a Government servant and an honest taxpayer who understands the needs of the residents of the constituency,” Romesh Sabharwal told India Today.

Arvind Kejriwal (AAP)

Arvind Kejriwal joined politics formally in 2012, when he launched the Aam Aadmi Party. Before joining politics, Kejriwal worked in the Indian Revenue Service (IRS) as a Joint Commissioner, Income Tax in New Delhi. He is a graduate in Mechanical Engineering, from Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kharagpur.

In 2006, Kejriwal was awarded with the Ramon Magsaysay Award for Emergent Leadership in recognition of his involvement in the grassroots level movement Parivartan, using Right to Information legislation, in a campaign against corruption, post which he resigned from the Government Service. He has also been monumental in leading the Jan Lokpal Anti- Corruption movement, along with Anna Hazare and Kiran Bedi, in 2011.

Following the 2013 Delhi Assembly Elections, Arvind Kejriwal first took office as the Chief Minister of Delhi, in December 2013. However, in February 2014, he resigned due to his minority Government’s inability to pass his proposed anti-corruption legislation pertaining to lack of support from other political parties. In the 2015 Delhi Assembly Elections, the Aam Aadmi Party won 67 out of the 70 seats in Delhi, securing Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Ministerial Office again.

Both BJP and INC have pitched first- time candidates against Kejriwal in these elections.

Feature Image Credits: Outlook

Satviki Sanjay

[email protected]

Keep Reading