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
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:

  1. Forest Conservation(Amendment) Bill, 2023 which allows non-forest activities on forest lands and permits clearance of forest within 100kms of national border.
  2. 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.
  3. 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

Read Also: Is the Judiciary Really Independent in India?

Dhruv Bhati

[email protected]

The last three terms of the Lok Sabha have something in common: the wastage of the parliament’s stipulated working time.

Taking the case of the 16th Lok Sabha which started in 2014 and was dissolved in 2019 a total of 1,615 hours was the actual time the lower house, i.e., the Lok Sabha worked which is a staggering 40% lower than the average working time of Lok Sabha which is 2,689 hours.  A total of 16% of the time or the working hours were wasted due to obstructions like walkouts, etc. Coming to the Upper House, i.e., the Rajya Sabha we get to know that it also lost around 36% of its time due to such disruption. If we compare these disruptions to previous Lok Sabhas, we get to know that though the 16th Lok Sabha fared better than its predecessor the 15th Lok Sabha but fared poorly when compared to the 14th Lok Sabha. The 16th Lok Sabha sat for only 331 days which is significantly lower than the average of 468 days. Due to the massive NDA (National Democratic Alliance) majority in the 16th Lok Sabha it passed a total of 133 bills and 45 ordinances which is again more than its predecessor but less than the 14th Lok Sabha or the time of UPA (United Progressive Alliance). To add to this exiguous performance the Rajya Sabha was worse off than the Lok Sabha in terms of efficiency partly due to lack of NDA majority in Rajya Sabha. Even though there have been speculations and accusations that the NDA government made arbitrary decisions and was not discussing the bills enough but the data by PRS Legislative Research ( a prominent research institution based in New Delhi) tells us that more discussions were there in the 16th Lok Sabha as compared to previous assemblies.

In 2019, the Rajya Sabha worked at a distressingly low-efficiency rate of 7% whereas the Lok Sabha work was pegged at an efficiency rate of 77%, which though is more than its compatriot but way lesser than the average of the parliament during the monsoon sessions which normally is around 95%. These facts and figures show that nowadays political parties want to have an argument rather than a rational debate which just results in the delay of the government’s work and the citizens’ taxes. Even during the Question Hours of the parliament, the opposition tends to stick to its questions and not listen to the answers. It has been estimated that each working day of the Indian parliament costs the Indian taxpayers around Rs. 6,00,00,000 or Six crore rupees. The solution to this problem is not as simple blaming the other side for such disruptions rather it requires a sustained effort from the government’s side which should teach the MPs or the Members of the Parliament about the mannerisms under which they should conduct themselves in, as these are not mere politicians but elected representatives of more than 1.3 billion Indian Citizens who need to work tirelessly for the betterment of this nation.


To get a better perspective on the issue, we asked some students about their views on the problem. Khushi Malhotra of Maharaja Agrasen College, says, “Efficiency isn’t present there. These people make the decisions for our nation, but still, political propaganda is given more importance than actual decision making. Often the opposition just tries to avoid passing bills for the ruling party like the Prasar Bharati Bill, 1979”. Apart from this another student, Sriya Rane from Cluster Innovation Centre (DU), tells us, “The Indian Parliament only works for 75 days while in Britain the working days amount to 152. Even though absenteeism has now reduced but still the problem is there. In other countries, the MPs are paid according to their attendance but in India, the salary is on a monthly basis and thus the MPs aren’t motivated to come to the parliament itself. Thus, the productive output of the parliament isn’t optimum”.


 Feature Image Credits: Surbhit Rastogi for DU Beat

Aniket Singh Chauhan

[email protected]

Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has moved the Delhi High Court (HC) against the protesting students for “gross violation” of the court’s previous order of August 2017 banning protests within 100 metres of the administrative block. 

The contempt plea has been filed by JNU Registrar Pramod Kumar, along with the University’s standing counsel Monika Arora against the protesting students for violation of the Court’s order of 2017 banning protests within 100 metres of the administrative block. As reported by news agency Indo-Asian News Service, the plea is filed against the Delhi Police, JNU Students’ Union (JNUSU) President Aishe Ghose, General Secretary Satish Chandra Yadav, Vice President Saket Moon and former JNU student leaders N. Sai Balaji, Geeta Kumari, Sarika Choudhary, Apeksha Priyadarshani, Krishna Rao, among others.

The plea read, “The instant petition is being preferred by the university against the contemnors for gross and continuing violation of the order dated 09.08.2017…by protesting within 100 meters of the administrative block and the day-to-day administration of the petitioner University due to which the working of the university has come to a standstill.”

Two FIR’s have been registered against JNU students on Tuesday who clashed with the Delhi Police. The FIR’s have been registered at two different police stations against unidentified individuals. Over the past few weeks, severe protests have led to clashes with the police after they were barred from marching towards the Parliament as it reconvened for the winter session. Delhi Police set up barricades and closed down four metro stations around the Parliament. Students were allegedly lathi-charged which led to severe injuries to both police personnel and the students.

JNUSU on Tuesday said they are ready to undertake a march to the Parliament 10 times if their demands are not met. The resignation of JNU Vice-Chancellor Mamidala Jagadesh Kumar has also been demanded. JNUSU President Aishe Ghosh quoted to The Hindustan Times, “Police had detained at least a hundred students including me, and Satish (General Secretary of JNUSU), just to make sure the high powered meeting with the secretary (MHRD) does not take place.” Followed by a press conference in the JNU Administrative block, she addressed, “We have made it clear in the meeting, that the agitation will stop only after all our demands are accepted, and if the VC has a problem with that then we demand his resignation…”


Students at JNU have been protesting against the fee hike and have conveyed their demands to the Ministry of Human Resource Development. One of which stated, the protesting students should not face any enquiry.


Feature Image Credits: DU Beat Archives

Anandi Sen
[email protected]

On 12 March, the Leader of Opposition of the Parliament of Hindu College was allotted an office space, for the first time in the Parliament’s near hundred-year-old history. How significant would this be?

A day before Hindu College’s annual fest, Mecca, Naveen Kumar, the Leader of Opposition of the College Parliament, proudly announced on his official Facebook page the allotment of a formal office space to the parliamentary representative.

Unlike many students’ unions, Hindu College has a Parliament – christened the ‘Parliament of the Republic of Hindu College’ – to which the student elections are held. According to the constitution of the college, the candidate with the maximum number of votes is elected as the Prime Minister (PM), who then appoints his Cabinet, while the candidate securing the second highest number of votes becomes the Leader of Opposition (LOP). The same constitution also provides for formal office spaces to both functionaries. However, while the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) had been in place in the college, the office of the LOP had been absent till now.

Image Source: Facebook Naveen Kumar, the incumbent Leader of Opposition of Hindu College.
Image Source: Facebook
Naveen Kumar, the incumbent Leader of Opposition of Hindu College.

The situation changed under Naveen’s incumbency. He tells us that he had been at work since September to get the space allotted. While his term is about to end soon, he hopes that the new development will benefit the subsequent LOPs.

Often, the margin between the votes pulled in by the PM and the LOP respectively isn’t very significant numerically. Naveen, who lost to Shreyash Mishra, the Prime Minister, fell only 44 votes short. Hence, the LOP also represents a major chunk of the students, as Naveen tells DU Beat, making an office space all the more necessary.

Elaborating on the significance of the office, he says that it would allow students to raise grievances and make the LOP more accessible so that their complaints could be better addressed – ultimately increasing accountability of the representatives, while also enhancing the significance of the position itself.

However, a problem that still persists is the low number of Parliamentary sessions organised in the college. Many students express this sentiment: a college that once was an intellectual centre of the nationalist movement, now sees its culture of debate and discussion declining. Without Parliamentary sessions, one is made to wonder if the representatives can actually be held accountable and whether the politics of the college could go beyond Mecca to addressing more pressing issues.

Pointing at how the office has been a long time in the making, Naveen says, “People tell me that it took a long time and that my term is ending; I tell them it’s been a hundred and twenty years since the college was established. Compared to that, the few months of my term are nothing!”

Image Credits: DU Beat

Prateek Pankaj

[email protected]


After a controversial budget session, the Hindu College Parliament conducted “interaction sessions” to recruit a team called “The Squad” that will be closely working on flagship college events.

On 31st October the registration forms for the “The Squad” recruitments were released. The form explained “The Squad” as “an impeccable team of highly adept Hinduites with a wide range of abilities and an untiring work ethic. It is an opportunity to be a part of something great, and to create something great. It is an opportunity to prove your mettle, make friends, and have fun and at the end, come out as a more rounded and evolved version of yourself.”

The interviews were scheduled for 1st, 2nd and 3rd of November 2018 from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the Prime Minister’s office. They were taken in a batch of five on the first come and first serve basis. On 1st and 2nd November, Prime Minister Shreyash Mishra was present during the sessions.
On the condition of anonymity, a member who was part of the screening panel from the Parliament said, “We have changed the interview format to the interaction format so that we get to know the prospective team members and they get to know us. We also aim at making the atmosphere more approachable. You can all these sessions as a way to familiarise the recruits with our agendas and faces.”

“70% of students have filled Event Management as their interest area, but since the field of works is pretty fluid there won’t be any demarcation of work immediately. We will be having regular meetings and brainstorming sessions about the upcoming events and those who are regular, sincere, and show initiative will be given important positions accordingly,” he further added. The people representing the Parliament (interviewers) were not identified by the DU Beat correspondent and their identifies were guarded when we questioned about the same.

Line outside the PM's Office for the interaction session.
The line outside the PM’s Office for the interaction session.

Sharing her experience post the session, Nimilitha, a first-year Statistics Honours student said, “The interaction was really fun and engaging. I told the interviewers our expectations as well as the criticisms of the Parliament. They responded to both very sportingly. I look forward to hearing from them and working closely for the college events.”

When asked about the absence of Naveen Kumar, the Leader of Opposition, from the process, DU Beat was informed that Naveen Kumar was duly invited but he did not choose to come. However, Naveen Kumar denied about the invitation and said, “See you can’t just tap on my shoulder and say ‘Bro, come to the PM’s office for this thing no’ and call it an invite. I will only accept an invitation if it’s formally communicated from PM’s office.” He also added that during the Freshers he was not given a formal invite.

Niharika Dabral

[email protected]

Feature Image Credits: Kartik Chauhan for DU Beat


The Parliament of Republic of Hindu College presented its annual budget for the present session on 29th October 2018. But the day was not without some political friction.

In a crowded auditorium amid cheers and jeers, the Republic of the Parliament of Hindu College presented its annual budget finally, on Monday. The budget session was delayed due to the non-submission of important documents in accordance with the Republic of Parliament of Hindu College. The inauguration-cum-budget session of the cabinet for this session was however, not organised without controversial intervention. The oath taking ceremony of the newly elected Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition and cabinet ministers was interrupted by the questioning of the legitimacy in the claims of the Prime Minister Shreyash Mishra in his agendas as issued before the elections last month.

To revisit the election campaign, the Shreyash Mishra team was proud to wear the badge of reservation of 40% seats in the cabinet for women candidates as the highlight of his campaigning. Even in the Prime Ministerial Debate, the current Prime Minister had outrightly mentioned the same agenda in his speech. However, hours before the election day in the college, two candidates merged to form an unprecedented coalition. The coalition government, having won the highest number of votes, came to power after the elections. The same government was expected to work its thoughts into actions through the capturing of power. But as it appeared to the students sitting in the auditorium of the college on Monday, only two ministers and two secretaries are female. As opposed to the promised 40%, approximately 18% of the cabinet comprises of women now.

The list of ministers and secretaries was only displayed on the day of inauguration of the Parliament. As a group of students raised their voice against the deceptive promises and non-fulfillment of agendas — amongst them Ananya Bhardwaj, a Prime Ministerial candidate herself a month ago — the highly supervised environment of the auditorium grew tense. The repeated questions shouted out were about women representation in the cabinet. Many students agreed with the questioning of inappropriate representation. However, the dissent was met with fierce indifference and later ordered to die lest the dissenters be shown the way out of the auditorium. The Prime Minister addressed the audience then, explaining the questionable representation. Also, he stated that if any woman displays the initiative to work, he will never begrudge her the opportunity. He went on to discredit Ananya Bhardwaj for never volunteering to take the charge or responsibilty and instead only opposing and raising questions now for the sake of it.

As for the allocation of the budget, the maximum increment that can be allowed to a society is 25% as per the rules. While the Literary Society received only a tenth on the 25% increment from last year, with a hike of a mere ?50, the appeals to increase the budget were ignored in the second and third rounds of updates. Likewise, many other societies received minimum increments. All in all, the total budget allotted to all the activities was a significantly small amount. The Leader of Opposition, Naveen Kumar, said regardingrthe allocation of the budget, “The allocation of budget has been quite appropriate for the societies, keeping in mind that only 25% can be increased in each consecutive year.”

Even as it is very difficult for everyone to be satisfied with democratic decisions, the financial element just adds to the mess. As many societies maintained their appeals, and as those appeals were filtered by the supporters of the coalition, never to reach the higher authorities, the budget session came to an end.

As the speaker for the Parliament, a faculty member, announced departure of the session, the group of dissenters went up on the stage to discuss the betrayal. But the accountable man in question chose to walk away.

The dissent erupted in the evening with a renewed fervour as Ananya Bhardwaj posted the entire story of the same discussion with Shreyash Mishra on her Facebook timeline, with the words, “…it was said explicitly by me that if he doesn’t find women in his panel, he should approach me. And of course, he never did. E-mails were written to him along with messages by women of the college to which there weren’t any replies.”

Naveen Kumar, the Leader of the Opposition posted on his Facebook account, “He rightly pointed out the fact that previous governments have been no better in giving women representation. Alas, he had to follow the same legacy.” Shreyash Mishra also announced that this was the “maximum number of women representatives in the cabinet”. Also exonerating himself, he said that the team could not harvest the incentivised and necessary number of women candidates willing to take up positions of responsibility. Kumar also mentioned in the same post, “Progressivism was talked about in his agenda but it clearly has not been interpreted well for progressivism stands for inclusiveness. But Mr. Mishra was anyway, proud to have given the maximum token representation so far.”

In the same post, Kumar works on subtlety. “Congratulations to his team, for not standing up to their promises, for reassuring Hinduites that Politics and Power is not a woman’s job and for not letting the voices be heard. Congratulations Hinduites, patriarchy will once again drive your student body around the vicinity of the boys hostel.”

As the new cabinet celebrates power, all Hinduites look forward to their exercising the same. Kumar writes, “With a hope that the same will not happen with the other agendas mentioned in your manifesto, and voices of students will not be suppressed by calling it an opinion of ‘a particular group’, I, Congratulate your entire team once again for indeed a very successful inaugural session.”

Disclosure: Ananya Bhardwaj has previously worked with DU Beat as a correspondent.

Feature Image Credits: Kartik Chauhan for DU Beat

Kartik Chauhan

[email protected]


War cries can be heard amidst scores of people seated in the Hindu College auditorium. It’s the day of the Prime Ministerial Debate, a battleground among warring factions that sets the tone for the highly anticipated college elections a couple of days later. It’s a pleasant pandemonium. Each Member of Parliament, seated, or standing high in passion to congratulate or hit back at the contestants in the cult like rhythmic chants of the crowd, is engaged in rhetoric, enabling a process that also keeps the person next seat engaged, politically. In what might seem like a cacophonic environment characterised by sloganeering lies the political dispensation of Republic of Hindu College that every student here actively engages in.

Poetics doesn’t seem to shy away from the jam-packed auditorium for the right and the left sides support different candidates. The event, which is in its 5th year now is organised by the Symposium society of the college. It is a celebration of the parliamentary system that the college follows, a microcosm of the national level parliament.

The college parliament is a students’ representative body that has a Prime Minister with her cabinet, the leader of opposition, Speaker and the President. Members of Parliament are the students of the college who sustain the ethos of the system by coming out in large numbers to vote on the day of elections. The cabinet has ministers with individual responsibilities of Finance, Literature, Sports, Culture, etc. The Prime Minister, on her discretion elects the cabinet ministers. Even the Civil Services finds representationas secretaries actively work under various ministries.

With the beginning of the session, political activity in the multi-layered structure of varsity politics at DU is visible in the college, much in line with other colleges. In the run up to elections, bringing in various departments (smaller political bodies) and societies within the fold of a faction forms a major part of the political strategy. That identity politics keeps at an arms-length from the college’s political contest is evident from systematic bludgeoning of any attempts at giving the contest an identity based colour.

The Parliament is also responsible for allocating funds to various societies that run in the college. Part of the agenda is focused on enabling impediment free environment to the societies and their functioning.

As an institution, its functioning is steered by the Speaker (a faculty member) whose appointment is done by the President (College Principal). With seasonal sessions, on lines with the national Parliament, one dispensation of the Hindu College parliament functions for one fiscal year.

Over the years, debates and discussions on various international issues like the Cold War, 1962 War with China, 1972 Liberation of Bangladesh and state sanctioned excesses and human rights violations have upheld the sundry nature of issues discussed. The parliament has passed various bills in relation to issues of national and international importance.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s approval of the college’s system while claiming that “India has only 2 Prime Ministers. One sits in the Indian parliament and other in Hindu College”; his categorical equation, is symptomatic of not just the structural credibility of the institution but also its workability in representing the students.


Sidharth Yadav

[email protected]