Latest
DU Beat – Delhi University's Independent Student Newspaper
Tag

Slider

Browsing
DUB Speak

From Killing Ideas to Killing Intellectuals: The Institutional Murder of G.N. Saibaba

By

Prof. G.N. Saibaba did not ‘pass away’ on 12th October 2024. He was gradually and brutally murdered by the state, the Indian academia, and our collective silence. The Indian university has become a graveyard, with students and academics being executed for voicing their opinions. Is staying silent the best that we are capable of?

 

The first time I came across G.N. Saibaba was in a social media post from 2022 that dealt with his ongoing case and featured the poem ‘I Refuse to Die’ from the collection of his prison poetry and letters, Why Do You Fear My Ways So Much? The poem and his case prompted me to buy the book and read more about him. G.N. Saibaba was the first poet I read after getting admitted to the literature program at the University of Delhi in 2022, and I carried the text with me to my first lecture in college only in the hope that someone would recognise it. The text became my first introduction to the oppression that the DU administration and the state are capable of meting out to a 90% disabled professor, even before I physically reached my college. It was only a matter of a few months before I would witness academic precarity firsthand in my department when my professors would be displaced, and later, Prof. Samarveer Singh of Hindu College would be forced to take his life. 

 

G.N. Saibaba’s death is simultaneously, both a rare case of UAPA in which each institution of the state and even the university administration worked in tandem with each other but led to Saibaba’s eventual bail and also another case of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) imposed on the academic-activist on no solid grounds, except for his alleged “links with the banned Maoist party.” 

 

Though the BJP-led government has made significant amendments to the UAPA and excessively imposed it on students, academics, and activists to curb any criticism of the state in the last decade, it is important to note that the draconian law was imposed on Saibaba by the Congress-led UPA government in 2012. The misuse of the colonial era law by the UPA government, a part of which today stands as an alternative and the opposition to the NDA alliance, allowed the exploitation of the law and for it to be made arbitrary by the latter, to the extent that the law was amended to shift the burden of proof from the accuser, usually the state, to the accused, making bails in such cases extremely rare.

 

Though Saibaba was granted bail, he was not even allowed to visit his mother’s funeral and was physically tortured by the prison authorities during his abduction-cum-arrest from DU campus and in jail that led to the paralysis of his left arm, denied basic healthcare facilities, and even contracted the coronavirus twice while he was in jail. Despite all of these grave concerns, Saibaba was continuously denied bail, even though several high profile individuals were given bail during the pandemic. When he was finally acquitted in October 2022 by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, the Maharashtra government filed a petition and challenged the HC’s order at the Supreme Court, and on the very next day, Saturday 15th October 2022, a special bench of the SC comprising Justice Bela Trivedi and Justice M.R. Shah stayed the HC’s acquittal order, citing how the “brain is the most dangerous and integral part of committing terrorism-related offences”. 

 

The profiling of progressive academics, activists, and intellectuals as ‘terrorists’ has been made into a common practice by the state and the university administrations have also been actively complicit in this. It is alleged that a colleague of Saibaba at the Ram Lal Anand College was responsible for helping the state frame him in the case. Prof. Saibaba was also unfairly terminated from his job as an assistant professor at Ram Lal Anand College, DU even before he was proved guilty in the case. 

 

This atmosphere of fear and surveillance in the saffronised university space has not only been responsible for the death of several intellectuals but has also been actively used by the state to break networks of solidarity—in the case of Prof. Hany Babu who was a part of the defence committee for Saibaba and has also been incarcerated under UAPA. Even the lawyer Surendra Gadling who fought the case for Saibaba’s release was charged with UAPA and the judges who had acquitted Saibaba have faced consequences for the same. 

 

In conversation with DU Beat at a memorial organised for Saibaba, Professor Jenny Rowena, wife of Hany Babu, said,

We always talk about issues when somebody dies, then it becomes a viral thing. We saw Rohith Vemula when he was alive. How much attention do we give to these people? Even now, people who are in jail because they campaigned for Saibaba, like Hany Babu, Rona Wilson, and Surendra Gadling, who was their lawyer, are still in jail. These people also have a lot of health problems, so are we waiting for the same to happen to them? We all should really protest against UAPA. All condolence meetings that we have should also be against UAPA. There should be a mass movement against it, because they [the state] are using it ruthlessly now to crush any kind of opposition and dissent.”

 

The law has been reduced to a tool of state repression and is being increasingly used to arrest students, young activists, academics and other intellectuals who criticise the state under the garb of ‘national security’ and by labelling them as terrorists. Not only is it absurd that young students and 90% disabled professors are labelled as ‘terrorists’ and potential ‘threat to the nation’ but it is against the constitutional values that promote critical and free thinking. In fact the very structured and systematic manner in which each institution of the state and each public institution including the universities and the media is working in complicity with the state to corner dissenters is in itself a symptom of a regime of terror that the UAPA supposedly seeks to counter. 

 

It is also important to take into cognizance the notions of ‘terrorism’ that UAPA seems to be against. Is fighting for the rights of Adivasis and against their killings terrorism? Is peacefully opposing state operations such as Operation Green Hunt and Operation Samadhan an act of terrorism?

 

Is mere ‘links with Maoist organisations’, as Saibaba was accused of, or ‘possession of Marxist literature’ terrorism? If yes, do students of the humanities and social sciences, particularly literature and history, who study Marxism as a compulsory part of their course, pose a threat to the nation and are terrorists? Does mere engagement with or belief in a particular ideology that may or may not be critical of the state’s beliefs, constitute as terrorism? Today, even asking these questions can lead to the imposition of a UAPA case. In fact, academics who have worked on such topics for their PhDs are often harassed by prestigious academics and labelled as anti-national in job interviews. 

 

The law is being increasingly used to destroy public universities by imprisoning students such as Umar Khalid, Gulfisha Fatima, and Sharjeel Imam, among hundreds of other students for peacefully protesting against divisive laws, an undeniable law of each citizen. The incarceration of these students under UAPA have also been orchestrated so as to ‘set an example’ for dissenting students and to silence them, developing a disquiet culture of suppression and destroying the culture of resistance that India’s public universities have been known for. 

 

The constant ‘red-flagging’ of individuals who identify with the Left or are in opposition to the state policy and may or may not identify with the Left, in conjunction with the profiling of individuals as “urban naxals” by state authorities, including the Prime Minister, not only qualifies as discrimination on the basis of ideas and leads to connotations of anti-state and anti-national individuals, but also leads to anti-intellectualism that has been identified as one of the most important factors behind the development of a fascist state.

 

Though the judges at the Supreme Court have been citing how “bail is the rule and jail is the exception”, it does not seem to apply to UAPA cases, more than half of which are not being investigated, as per the National Crime Records Bureau. In Saibaba’s murder and the human right violations as a part of it, the state did not merely attempt, though unsuccessfully, to kill his ideas but also take away his life, as it did with Father Stan Swamy, Pandu Narote, and SAR Geelani. By unfairly terminating his contract with the university, it was ensured that Saibaba does not get to teach his students ever again and one of his most heartfelt desires to teach students after being released from prison, was left unfulfilled. As Saibaba remarked in one of his letters to his students and colleagues from the prison:

I hope none of you should feel sympathetic to my condition. I don’t believe in sympathy; I only believe in solidarity. I intended to tell you my story only because I believe that it is also your story. Also because I believe my freedom is your freedom.”

 

Even in solitary confinement, his desire for freedom was not restricted to himself. The campaign against him was not only unfair to him but also his family and also his students, who were not allowed to be taught by a brilliant scholar, teacher, and translator whose translations of Kabir have been the most significant and timely in English so far. 

 

Though we have been reduced to observing birthdays, death anniversaries, and anniversaries of arrests of activists and students as they remain incarcerated without trials and more than a handful of unsuccessful hearings, the outrage at the murder of Prof. G.N. Saibaba is both a culmination of our complicity in his murder and simultaneously a rupture in the amnesia surrounding state repression under UAPA. That should pave the way for a movement against UAPA and the larger culture of saffronisation-infused anti-intellectualism. For the message should be clear: the state should not and cannot kill ideas, let alone individuals. As Saibaba himself claimed and rightly so, he and his ideas and struggles refuse to be forgotten and to die..

 

Read Also: DU Collective comes together in solidarity and remembrance of Professor G.N. Saibaba

 

Featured Image Credits: Shahid Tantray’s Instagram 

 

Vedant Nagrani

[email protected] 

Keep Reading
By
Features

Diddy, Beyoncé, and a whole lot of Conspiracy Theories

By

The music industry giant Sean “Diddy” Combs faces serious allegations of sex trafficking and abuse. Lawsuits reveal disturbing accounts of exploitation, while societal desensitisation and memes undermine the gravity of these issues and the plight of victims.

 

Trigger Warning: Mention of sexual assault and rape

The hip-hop music industry, which started off as a cultural rebellion born under the influence of Black Panthers, has become politically hollow and morally degenerate. Unchecked power and incalculable influence permeate the music record labels, shaping the sounds we hear and the faces we idolise today. The most prominent faces in the music industry, even our favourite celebrities, too imprudent and decadent in their greed for power and money, are often complicit in the toxic power structures that perpetuate the endless cycle of exploitation and corruption.

Sean “Diddy” Combs, a rapper and music magnate credited with helping launch the careers of some of the biggest stars through his record label ‘Bad Boy Records’ and creating a monopolist empire of his own in the music industry, was arrested in September on sex trafficking and racketeering charges with federal prosecutors alleging that Combs and his associates threatened, abused, and coerced women, minors, and others around him “to fulfil his sexual desires.” It also included forcing victims into engaging in recorded sexual activity, which he referred to as “Freak Offs.” On October 1, The Los Angeles Times reported, more than 100 people have planned to file lawsuits against Combs, alleging that he sexually abused and exploited them.

 

However, by 14th October, six more lawsuits were filed, mostly by victims who were sexually assaulted by Combs when they were minors. Combs, throughout his career, has been linked to a number of conspiracy theories and accused of numerous charges. In 2003, his clothing brand, Sean John, was accused of violating Honduran labour laws as the factories were based in Honduras. The National Labour Committee said that the employees were forced to work overtime and were paid sweatshop wages. In 2017, he was sued for sexual harassment by his chef, and the suit was settled out of court. However, since Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, singer and Diddy’s ex-girlfriend, filed a lawsuit against him in November 2023, a multitude of allegations have come out against him.

After years of silence and darkness, I am finally ready to tell my story and to speak up. On behalf of myself and for the benefit of other women who face violence and abuse in their relationships,” states Casandra.

 

Casandra met Combs in 2005 when she was 19 years old and was signed under his label. The lawsuit also states that Diddy used his position of power to “set the groundwork” for a “manipulative and coercive romantic and sexual relationship.” She also accused the musician of sexual abuse and rape and claimed that many of these incidents were witnessed by his “tremendously loyal network,” who “were not willing to do anything meaningful” to stop the violence.

 

They settled the case for an undisclosed amount a day after it was filed in New York. However, the chain of sexual assault lawsuits that followed after dates back to 1991. An anonymous lawsuit was filed by a woman who alleged that Diddy, along with another man, coerced her into engaging in sexual activities. In a separate case, Joi Dickerson-Neal accused the artist of drugging and sexually assaulting her when she was a college student in 1991. She further claimed that he filmed the incident and later shared the footage with others without her consent. In a third lawsuit, Liza Gardner alleged that Diddy and another individual sexually assaulted both her and a friend over three decades ago, when she was 16 years old. All of these lawsuits came forward shortly before the expiration of the New York Adult Survivors Act. The act gave the victims the ability to file civil lawsuits, even after the statutes of limitations have expired.

 

The prosecutors in the indictment claim that Combs and his associates allegedly transported sex workers across state lines—which constitutes sex trafficking and transportation—to engage in prostitution and allegedly drugged women to keep them “obedient and compliant.” USA attorney Damien Williams said Sean Combs led and participated in a racketeering conspiracy that used the business empire he controlled to carry out criminal activity including sex trafficking, forced labour, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and the obstruction of justice. He further implied that there are three main charges that Diddy is currently facing: racketeering, sex trafficking, and transportation to engage in prostitution. During a search of Combs’ residences in March, investigators reportedly recovered over 1,000 bottles of baby oil and lubricant, along with other items referred to as “Freak Off supplies,” according to the indictment. Additionally, firearms and ammunition were discovered, including “three AR-15 rifles with defaced serial numbers.”

 

The internet has restored “Thanking Beyoncé” as a meme following her alleged close relationship with Combs. In a spiral of various conspiracy theories that are being spinned, a theory linking Beyoncé and Jay-Z to the deaths of several prominent artists is gaining traction online. It is being alleged that the couple may be connected to the untimely deaths of figures such as Aaliyah, Lisa “Left Eye” Lopes, and Michael Jackson, implying they were targeted for not aligning with the interests of a powerful trio, including Combs. Video clips presenting the intriguing frequency with which celebrities express gratitude towards Beyoncé and Jay-Z during award ceremonies, even without direct connections to the event, are also being highlighted. Adele’s acknowledgement of Beyoncé during her 2017 Grammy acceptance speech and Britney Spears’ tribute to the couple at the 2023 People’s Choice Awards have led fans to speculate about the couple’s influence within the entertainment industry.

 

Further, past videos of Combs with Justin Bieber, shot when the latter was still a minor, have resurfaced. In one of the videos, Sean Diddy mentioned spending 48 hours with Justin, which he referred to as a ’15-year-old’s dream’.

 

All of these charges against Combs are repulsive and excruciatingly horrific. The information regarding the 1,000 bottles of baby oil took social media by storm and entirely for different reasons. Too many memes related to the incident obscured the gravity of the situation. The collective moral apathy towards the victims exposes a deep-seated moral decay of our society. We are so beaten down by the endless cycle of exploitation and desensitised by the constant stream of media that we have resorted to humour as a coping mechanism. By turning a heinous crime into mere internet fodder, we allow the real predator to slip through the cracks, much like what happened with the Epstein Island case, all forgotten.

 

Read Also: Coldplay, Concerts, and Cash Cows

Image Credits: AFP via Getty Images

Reeba Khan

[email protected] 

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

DU Collective comes together in solidarity and remembrance of Professor G.N. Saibaba

By

On 15th October, 2024, a tribute was paid to Professor G.N. Saibaba at Arts Faculty Gate, University of Delhi, posthumously. A public meeting and a candlelight vigil were observed by students’ and teachers’ organizations, which were joined by civil society members, colleagues, and activists who worked alongside Saibaba. 

G. N. Saibaba, former Assistant Professor at Delhi University, passed away on October 12 at the Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences in Hyderabad due to postoperative complications after a surgery to remove gallbladder stones. Saibaba was arrested in 2014 under the “draconian” UAPA for charges of working alongside members of the banned CPI (Maoist) and its alleged frontal organization, the Revolutionary Democratic Front. In 2021, Delhi University terminated his employment following the UAPA case against him. However, he was not reinstated after his acquittal in March 2024. It was claimed by many that Saibaba, a 90% disabled academic and human rights activist, was “wrongfully incarcerated” for a decade and “tortured” by the state during court trials and also during the period of jail time where he was forced to live in solitary confinement, declined proper medical care, and even prohibited from meeting his mother after her passing away. Sai’s death was received as an institutional murder by fellow academics, students and others.

The solidarity and remembrance event at Arts Faculty included speakers who highlighted Sai’s resilience, his revolutionary spirit, and his long struggle against exploitation and oppression. The speakers included Professors Karen Gabriel, N Sachin, Abha Dev Habib, Vikas Gupta, Jitendra Meena, and Saroj Giri. Kamal Singh from PUCL, Jagdish from DGMF, and representatives of student groups also shared their memories and thoughts.

Addressing the people, Professor Karen Gabriel said,

The term Urban Naxal has been structured against those who have understood the logic of the system and move through it and destroy it…UAPA not only destroys individuals but also families and communities.

Professor N. Sachin urged the masses to rise in “remembrance and rage” for Saibaba “against a system of induced apathy.”

Professor Vikas Gupta held that,

It is in Saibaba that we see a commitment to social justice” and also that “it is not possible to fight against one kind of inequality; the struggle is against all violations of social justice.

In conversation with DU Beat, Professor Abha Dev Habib said,

Sai’s death is an institutional murder because his minimum needs such as medical care were not provided. The state could not prove anything against Saibaba even after 10 years. He was denied bail every time he approached the court, and even when the high court was to set him free, the state would go against it; he couldn’t get justice from the state. All those who are opinion-builders, those who can speak for a more equal society and democratic rights, are being put behind bars. Sai Baba has been taken away too early from us. The University also did not give him justice. Even before it was proved he was guilty or not guilty, the university terminated his employment. By terminating his employment, his right to livelihood was also taken away. The state, the society, and we as people have wronged him by not speaking up.

The cause of all other political prisoners facing, what the participants maintained to be, “wrongful incarceration” was put forward, and it was demanded that they be released. They foregrounded the cases of activists such as Hany Babu, Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulshifa Fatima, and Rona Wilson who continue “languishing” in jails, undergoing extended trial periods, and face “terror litigation”.

Further, instances of “state-structured violence” and “physiological torture” of political prisoners jailed under UAPA was recounted, where people like tribal rights activists Stan Swamy and Pandu Narote, passed away in jail after their bails were denied on several counts.

Speaking to DU Beat, Professor Jenny Rowena, wife of Hany Babu, said,

We always talk about issues when somebody dies, then it becomes a viral thing. We saw Rohith Vemula when he was alive. How much attention do we give to these people? Even now, people who are in jail because they campaigned for Saibaba, like Hany Babu, Rona Wilson, and Surendra Gadling, who was their lawyer, are still in jail. These people also have a lot of health problems, so are we waiting for the same to happen to them? We all should really protest against UAPA. All condolence meetings that we have should also be against UAPA. There should be a mass movement against it, because they [the state] are using it ruthlessly now to crush any kind of opposition and dissent.

Further, slogans against the “genocidal” Operation Kagar and Surajkund Scheme were raised. The public meeting was followed by a candlelight vigil in which all friends, comrades, and students of the revolutionary Saibaba paid a tribute to him.

 

Read also: Of Separation, Solidarity, and Sustenance

 

Featured image credit: Shahid Tantray’s Instagram

 

Bhavana Bhaskar

[email protected]   

Keep Reading
By
Reviews

Dub Review: Nobody Wants This

By

The author wishes to review the recently released romantic-comedy, ‘Nobody Wants This,’ but may not be able to aptly, critically ‘review’ a rom-com for her bias towards all things love runs strong. 

 

I like all romance movies. I hardly ever critically analyse the flaws of a rom-com simply because the joy of watching two people find their way to each other is so heartwarming that I don’t really care about the character development, political setting, plot cohesiveness and all those other parameters. There’s banter, emotional upheaval, swoon-worthy romance? Bam! You’ve got me hooked. So rest assured, I immensely liked Nobody Wants This, the newest rom-com that is all the rage on Instagram right now. 

 

It is a will-they-won’t-they story starring Kristen Bell and Adam Brody on Netflix. Kristen Bell as Joanne is a serial dater (who finds the most superfluous faults in her dates) and her romantic misadventures become the meat for her and her sister to dig into, on their weekly podcast called ‘Nobody Wants This’. Joanne is adamant to tell everyone that the podcast is more than just about sex and relationships; it is a platform for people to open up and “feel empowered”. Joanne is not demure and mindful. Oh no. She meets our male eye candy- Adam Brody as Noah, a rabbi, at a party and they both instantly hit it off. Noah is goofy, funny and self-effacing. The first time I watched it, I couldn’t look past Brody’s Adam’s apple (forgive the pathetic wordplay), and his basketball skills (or the lack thereof). Fleabag gave us our Hot Priest so, of course, we needed a Hot Rabbi.

 

The chemistry between Joanne and Noah is palpable, I was giggling the entire time they talked. They start dating. But trouble in paradise? Noah is a devout rabbi and his job and relationship with his deeply religious family could be at risk if he dates someone who isn’t Jewish. I don’t like when the only major problem in any American TV relationship turns out to be infidelity (Ross and Rachel in Friends, Mike and Rachel in Suits, and the list goes on). I am bored of the trope of cheating which has been overdone to exhaustion. So, I found it refreshing that what drew the couple apart was religion and cultural differences. Noah fosters a deep reverence for Judaism and Joanna is, well, a shiksa (a gentile woman; code word for a big blonde). 

 

By the end of the season, their relationship seems to have reached a dead end without a possible future, unless Joanne converts to Judaism. And so, it is up to our oh-so-adorable couple to figure out what they’re both willing to give up to find their way to each other. The show ends on a cliffhanger, which is why it would take me 5 business days to emotionally recover if they don’t bring in a season 2 immediately.

 

Let me just brief you about the eccentric supporting cast before I start gushing about Adam Brody in the next paragraph. Justine Lupe serves as Joanne’s sister, Morgan who seems to be rudely disappointed as Joanne starts dating Noah. She absolutely hates being reduced to number 2 on Joanne’s list of priorities, and you know, as a younger sister myself, I support her. Joanne and Morgan rant and fight and make money together. Timothy Simons (Veep’s famed Jonah), who plays Noah’s brother Sasha is the tall, lumbering “loser sibling” who surprisingly turns out to be a great dad to his teenage daughter. Trust Sasha to throw all the geeky, comic punchlines. A nosy, overbearing mother, a dad who nods to all that his wife says and a sister-in-law who stubbornly refuses to like Joanne makes Noah’s family complete. As far as Joanne’s parents go, it’s a bit more complicated than that, so maybe just watch the show, you’ll know. 

 

Now, coming to the internet’s newest favourite boyfriend, Adam Brody. I think the reason everybody adored Adam Brody in ‘Nobody Wants This’ is not because of his chiselled nose and endearing smile⁠—though he definitely gets brownie points for that. It’s because he is a 30-something, emotionally competent man who holds his lady love and tells her she is not too much, that he “can handle her.” He never tells a very volatile Joanne that she is overreacting. He is not scared of her oscillating emotions, mood swings and vulnerability. I think all women, everywhere, were healed.

 

Read Also: DUB Review: Breaking Barriers with Brilliance: ‘Laapata Ladies’

 

Featured Image Credits: Netflix

 

Chetna Rani

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Features

Atishi’s rise to power and AAP’s political playbook

By

Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest and subsequent resignation were followed by claims of “wanting the court of the people to decide his return.” Atishi Marlena’s appointment as the Chief Minister poses a significant shift in the party dynamics. How will this potentially impact the 2025 Vidhan Sabha Elections in Delhi?

On March 21, 2024, Arvind Kejriwal was arrested due to his alleged involvement in corruption during the now-expired Delhi liquor excise policy. He was granted bail on 18th September 2024, after which he suddenly announced his resignation from the post of Delhi’s Chief Minister. Atishi was unanimously elected in his place. Known for her academic prowess, with a Rhodes Scholarship and degrees from Oxford University and St. Stephen’s College, Atishi’s rise to the post of Chief Minister is crucial since AAP has always balanced theatrics with governance. This strategy of emotionally appealing to the masses is a significant strategy that has helped it dominate Delhi’s diverse political landscape. 

Under Kejriwal’s leadership and even before, it heavily relied on grabbing attention through theatrics. From Kejriwal’s dharnas to his direct confrontations with the centre, he has helped solidify AAP’s identity as a party that serves the people. In the 2014 dharna outside the Rail Bhawan, for instance, he demanded control over the Delhi Police. He famously declared himself an “anarchist,” framing himself as the defender of the identity of the common man against the central authority—a saviour from the masses who will fight against the disruptive political status of the country. In 2019, his indefinite hunger strike demanding full statehood for Delhi further added to his political image. Such theatrical tactics have been a central strategy to keep the party relevant, and Atishi also seems to have adopted the same. 

Since the last few parliamentary elections, AAP has been known for its unique blend of populism and occasionally successful administrative situations. As a result, although Atishi is well-known for her contributions to policy and education from her time serving as an advisor to the Delhi Government, her rise to the position of Chief Minister is simply another move in the AAP’s political playbook and not a reflection of her ability. Even if Atishi deviates from the conventional political narrative thanks to her image as a serious policymaker, she will not be able to avoid the dramatic flair that the AAP loves. Additionally, all her attempts to “clean up politics” and combat corruption are frequently followed by symbolic actions, such as sobbing, passing out, and ferocious speeches, in an attempt to connect with the public on an emotional level.

Another recurring theme in AAP’s political playbook is the idea of reluctant leaders, people entering politics and leadership out of a sense of public duty rather than mere ambition. Atishi can also be framed into this very mould, and her intellectual prowess, paired with her people-pleasing performances, only adds to her public appeal. 

“It almost feels like the party is partaking in a TV show of their own, in the hopes of swaying people and distracting them from real, more relevant issues, and unfortunately, they seem to be succeeding.”

– A second-year student from Delhi University

As Delhi’s Water Minister, Atishi famously went on strike, demanding the BJP-ruled state of Haryana to release water. Consequently, she was hospitalised and, according to claims made by AAP officials, lost 2 kg of weight. A video message was posted on her official X account, where she declared that she would continue the fast no matter how much her body suffers, until the people of Delhi receive justice. Following Manish Sisodia’s arrest, Atishi broke down into tears, claiming that this arrest was a part of a larger political vendetta against her party. Moreover, in her very first speech as the Chief Minister, she emotionally declared that they only have to do one work now, which is to make Arvind Kejriwal the chief minister again. 

While her rise is indicative of AAP’s calculated use of populism to preserve its public appeal, given that Atishi’s focus very evidently seems to be bringing Kejriwal back to power, her term may be more about upholding the Kejriwal legacy than establishing her own. The February elections will determine whether Delhi’s voters continue to be swayed by these spectacles or choose to focus on more substantial points.

 

Read Also: Education, Not Religious Agitataion: AAP and BJP in the Delhi Elections

Sakshi Singh 

[email protected] 

Featured Image Credits: Telegraph India

Keep Reading
By
Features

Legal education and the cost of dreams

By

Each year, thousands and thousands of students work hard and appear for CLAT (Common Law Admission Test), aspiring to crack into top law colleges. These students enter the campuses with big dreams and expectations, but in light of the recent suicide cases, are these premier institutes ready to facilitate integrated law programs or should they resort to the conventional three-year law programs?

Since the inception of the 5-year integrated programs in law in 1986, India has set global standards in the field of legal education. While many other countries like Australia, the U.K, the Philippines also offer five to six year courses in law, in India, after the establishment of NLUs (National Law Universities), programs like BA-LLB (Bachelors in Arts + Legislative Law), BBA-LLB (Bachelors in Business Administration + Legislative Law), BSC-LLB (Bachelors in Science + Legislative Law), BCOM-LLB (Bachelors in Commerce + Legislative Law), and BSW-LLB (Bachelors in Social Work + Legislative Law), have taken prominence. While courses like MBBS are often socially regarded as rigorous courses, the recognition in the case of 5-year law courses is not the same from the academic institutions. As a result, several students have taken their own lives.

In light of the recent events, mental stress, especially amongst law students, has become a burgeoning issue. When premier law schools like NLU-Delhi and RMLNLU (NLU-Lucknow) report suicide cases, wherein the administration is silent and people ask about ‘why’ and ‘how’ the incident occurred, it illustrates the urgency of the aforementioned issue. People often overlook the academic rigour, which is a prerequisite in these integrated programs. These people often act as the vice-chancellors and professors in these institutions, and are willing to undertake batches of 200 students, but do they have the required apparatus to facilitate them? 

Typically, these 5-year integrated programs involve 6 subjects in a semester, all of which are considered the core subjects (this may be subjected to some variation in some institutions). Three of these subjects are usually of your dual degree while the rest three are legal subjects. This format is followed till the end of 2nd year and majorly from 3rd year onwards, only law subjects are covered. The underlying problem that arises here is, that the current private and government universities have an inclination towards starting these integrated courses, but at the same time these courses demand experienced professors who hold expertise in the associated dual degree, with which the student is combining it’s LLB. Ad-hoc appointments of professors is not a new issue and has been faced by students from all universities under all disciplines, but the cases of such hurried appointments increase when we look at government institutions.

This illustrates the urgency to scrutinise the present administration in NLUs (National Law Universities) and other government-aided universities. The amount of rigour that is demanded in the aforementioned courses is often underscored. There is burgeoning pressure on students to get their papers published in renowned journals that are UGC-Care listed or have ISSN and ISBN numbers. Typically, universities often direct students to write two to three research papers per semester for every subject. In some subjects, students may be required to come up with group presentations, for example, students pursuing BBA-LLB often immerse themselves with business case studies in their initial years, but writing research papers for the law subjects remains a constant. These publications act as a non-negotiable asset for students who wish to apply to foreign universities for their LLM. Adding to this, moot courts and ADR (Alternate Dispute Resolution) competitions, become a quintessential aspect for resume building as companies nowadays prefer hiring students who are well versed with practical experiences in these events. Given all these prerequisites, when students are not supplemented with proper aid from their universities, it adds a heavy mental pressure on them. 

To add more on this, these events often require hefty registration fees. I myself, being a law student, at the ILC (Integrated Law Center), Faculty of law, University of Delhi, participated in an International Negotiation Competition, which was hosted by NMIMS Mumbai. The accommodation charges for the event amounted to 10,000 rupees + 18% GST, apart from this, the registration fees additionally were 5000 rupees + 18% GST. Even after qualifying for the advanced rounds, our university did not spare a single penny for us. I’m privileged enough to come from a well-to-do background, which helped me in financing my competition, but the same is not the case for other students. Moreover, non-NLU students have an added pressure of finding internships due to an existing bias of companies favouring students from National Law Universities.

I feel stressed. There is a constant fear that everyone will be in a better place in the future, and I’ll still be here just figuring out life. What if I’ll not succeed? What if all this is not for me? The moots, projects, 9-4 classes, and the pressure of doing more in the meantime is too much. The unsaid expectations that I have for myself are too much to handle. Having no one to talk to, yes, there are people who are there for me and will listen to me, but still not wanting to tell anyone and fighting alone. It feels like it’s all gonna be worth it at some point in life but when?”

                     – Riya Singh (a 2nd year law student at ILC, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi)

The recent suicide cases being reported from premier universities like NLU-Delhi, shed light on this. Within a month, the university has reported 3 suicide cases, and still there are almost no signs of student anecdotes and testimonials from the students, on any social media platform, which raises a lot of suspicion on the administration of the university. The first suicide of a 20 year old, third-year student, has brought forth shocking details. Amrutavarshiny Senthil Kumar reportedly came from a social minority group and has worked her way up to NLU-Delhi by garnering prestigious scholarships; her case, upon further investigation, has showcased harrowing details of caste-based discrimination, mental stress and harassment. The halls again echoed with similar concerns when, Shah Khushil Vishal, a first-year student at the university committed suicide in the same month. The students have received extremely strict guidelines from senior authorities, wherein students are not allowed to discuss such matters as it may lead to ‘unnecessary unrest amongst students’.

We were directed by our professors not to discuss about these incidents, especially on social media platforms as it can cause significant reputational damage and can prove to be detrimental for the university”

                                                                 – Anonymous (a 2nd  year student at NLU-Delhi) 

Although the university has now initiated many programs catering towards the mental health of the students, the question here is, if premier institutions like NLU-Delhi are handling their batches like this, what should we expect from others? 

Cracking a double-digit rank in CLAT (Common Law Admission Test) and getting into NLSIU Bangalore is a dream of lakhs and lakhs of law aspirants. Imagine being a rank holder and then making the decision to end your life in your first year itself. So was the case of Dhruv Jatin Thakkar, who was a first-year student at NLSIU Bangalore. Although further investigations have revealed that Dhruv was previously suffering from depression and was on medication and counselling sessions for the same, we say that our universities act as a ‘home away from home,’ but are they really well equipped to do so? 

Such incidents show us the credibility of NIRF rankings which should be heavily scrutinised. If the universities are not well-equipped to facilitate integrated programs for their students, then they should not move forward with it. As far as these premier institutions are concerned, much focus should be given on revitalising age-old norms and establishing a proper feedback mechanism wherein if students feel that a certain professor is not helping them, they should have the freedom to report the same with their anonymity.

Be it litigation or corporate law, be it a first-generation lawyer or a student with an established law background, every student aspires to achieve up to the best of their capabilities. As a first-generation law student myself, our visions and dreams should not suffer at the cost of administrative negligence and poor facilities of ‘ironic’ premier universities.

 

Read also: DSW: The Unresolved Crisis of Financial Aid at DU

Samvardhan Tiwari

[email protected]

Featured image credits: iPleaders

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

Coldplay, Concerts, and Cash Cows

By

The uproar surrounding the upcoming Coldplay concert sheds light on a bigger problem in the music industry. This article delves into the implications of such events on ticketing practices, fan experiences, and the evolving landscape of live entertainment in a digital age.

With the announcement of Coldplay performing in Mumbai in 2025, a frenzy gripped the Indian audience. Advertisements popped up on social media, influencers made reels hyping it up, and news channels made it their headlines. It came to be known as THE event of 2025 and became THE topic of conversation of current times.

Coldplay, being a band that Gen Z and Millennials grew up listening to, thus holds a special place in the lives of many. Their songs strike the strings of nostalgia in the hearts of people. The music video of their song “Hymn For The Weekend” being shot in India has further cemented their connection with the country.

People eagerly counted down the days for when the tickets would be sold. They had set up their devices, waiting for the clock to chime twelve when the tickets would go live. The excitement had been palpable as fans anticipated this crucial moment, fully invested in securing their chance to see the beloved band live. However, that enthusiasm was short-lived and soon gave way to disappointment and frustration.

The BookMyShow site crashed even before the tickets went live. People were stuck in long queues lasting hours; queues that did not seem to be moving in any particular order. People who managed to make it through the queue and select the seats had their site crash during payment. Tickets sold out within minutes. Almost immediately they were found being sold for increased prices at reselling sites. 

In a recent conversation with DU Beat, a diverse group of individuals stepped forward to share their personal experiences, 

“I had reached my turn and even though tickets were shown to be available, there was no option to choose from. Whether it was a glitch or scalping, it was really disheartening since I had been planning and saving up for the concert.”Said Diya.

“I logged in from two devices at the same time but both had the queues moving at different paces. My brother logged in from his device much later than me but was placed ahead in the queue. A friend of mine logged in and instead of being placed in the queue, was immediately taken to the payment window.” Said Navya.

“We were given four minutes to book the tickets. I had chosen the tickets, entered all the details and clicked to confirm payment when it showed that no more tickets were available.” Said Siddharth.

“I started the queue at around 73000 and around 61000 the entire stadium was sold out. This is mathematically impossible, even if each person had bought the maximum allowed four tickets.” Said Aadya.

The Economic Offences Wing of Mumbai Police has issued summons to BookMyShow’s CEO Ashish Hemrajani and its technical head. This comes after advocate Amit Vyas filed a case of fraud against BookMyShow.

BookMyShow has released a statement addressing the sale of unauthorised tickets, 

“BookMyShow has no association with any ticket selling/reselling platforms such as Viagogo and Gigsberg or third-party individuals to resell Coldplay’s Music Of The Spheres World Tour 2025 in India. Scalping is strictly condemned and punishable by law in India. We have filed a complaint with the police authorities and will provide complete support to them in the investigation of this matter. We urge you to not fall victim to these scams. Any tickets bought from unauthorised sources will be at the risk of the consumer, and can turn out to be fake tickets. Beware of such scammers.”

These reselling sites have often been in legal disputes over not supplying tickets, supplying counterfeit tickets, and selling the same ticket to multiple people. They have also received legal notices and heavy criticism over selling charity tickets for profit.

The discourse surrounding Coldplay’s concert provides a concerning commentary. In a hyper-capitalist world, concerts no longer remain a cherished experience between fans and their idol, or a joyful gathering for people to enjoy. Instead, they turn into cash cows, highly commercialised and commodified events driven by profit maximisation. Concerts have shifted from music to market, becoming the centre of a growing money-making landscape, many of the practices ranging from unethical to illegal. What was once a celebration of music has now transformed into a spectacle of consumerism.

It would be incorrect to say that concerts never had a commercial aspect to them, after all, it is a service, and the artists and organisers deserve to be paid fairly for providing it. What has changed, however, is the shift from compensation to exploitation. Ticket prices aren’t just high enough to cover costs, they are inflated for maximum profit. The focus is no longer on providing an experience for the fans, the very people responsible for putting the artist on the stage, but on creating more and more ways to extract money from them. With even basic amenities like drinking water and access to bathrooms being monetized, something that can lead to health problems for the attendees, concerts are increasingly viewing fans as mere wallets to tap into.

Even when tickets start at an affordable price, like at the Coldplay concert, they are immediately bought by resellers and scalpers and sold at exorbitantly inflated prices. The tickets ranging from ₹2,500 to ₹35,000 are being resold for more than 10 lakhs, representing a more than 2000% increase from the original price.

The chaos surrounding the Coldplay concert indicates a larger, troubling trend in the music industry, casting doubt upon the spirit of live music in the future. Can concerts remain shared celebrations of art and music, or will they be transformed into purely commodified events and exploitative enterprises?

Read also: Global Citizen Festival: Highlights

Samriddhi

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Features

Mohanchand to Mahatma: haunting ghosts of Gandhi

By

Gandhi is introduced as a messiah of morals to a child. Stories of the three monkeys turning the other cheek and the celebratory personhood of ‘the father of the nation’ have cast him away from ideologies appreciated critically to a domain of morality concerning only the judgement of an immediate right or wrong; this domain is scary for it appeals widely but negates a deeper philosophical intervention or understanding of the figure, what he stood as, and why he appeals still.

The modern Indian liberal attitude of tolerance and non-violence draws heavily on the principles of the Mahatma—a politically potent image inflated with the task of disseminating a high moral cause. Gandhi advocated for a legitimacy of authority to be found in the conscience of man, extending to include a moral regeneration of the people. This emphasis on ‘regeneration’ comes from the idea of the moral decadence of Indian people that resulted in colonial enslavement, thus allowing British rule. His path to freedom is that of an enlightened anarchy.

This rejection of constitutionalism and parliamentary democracy for Gandhi doesn’t come from a Marxist critique of democracy, which nonetheless repulsed him for being anchored in violence and the denial of God. The British parliament to Gandhi is a ‘sterile woman’ for not having ‘done a single good thing’ and a ‘prostitute’ because ‘it is under the control of a minister who changes from time to time.’ Why then is this non-democratic father of the biggest democracy still revered and set as a principle?

This essay is not an attempt to demystify Gandhi or dissect his ideological perspectives, considering the mixed bag his thoughts were and the considerable changes they underwent. Neither does this discredit his contribution to the freedom struggle. It rather tries to frame Gandhi’s relevance in a post-colonial world.

In a country that prides itself on elevating demigods with cult followings seasonally who influence entire elections, run scandals, encroach on lands, are crime apologists, and turn tides over with their bhakts, the occurrence of the image of an academic Mahatma shouldn’t then feel very alien. This nation of ours produces ‘godmen’ that talk of the culture taught by the Vedas, the Upanishads, and the Gita and always desperately want to “go back to” and restore the lost. Their appeal to reason involves the acting on a soul force which carves out an existence replicating some past, further nudging us towards living a more perfect life in embodying this now realised historical truth. As ahistorical and pathetic as it sounds, it works when nationalism taints it and it appeals to a nation fraught with poverty, patriarchy, corruption, casteism, and obviously, the aftertaste of centuries of imperialist-colonialism.

The appeal for religion that comes strictly from the Hindu tradition and charms the upper caste consciousness, parading as spiritualism and distinguishing between good and bad Hinduism is a peak Mahatma move from Gandhi. For Gandhi, the acme of Hinduism is to be found in the Ramrajya. The rule of Ramrajya was a central element of his political philosophy and social vision for India; it stood as the manifestation of a philosophical anarchy that his ideas professed. The memory of that Ramrajya reverberates strongly today as one would see in the right-wing fundamentalist ruling state wanting to capitalise on vote banks using a similar analogy. Now, one doesn’t need to venture into the fraudulent concept of the Ramrajya and what it entails for minorities living in India. Such imagination of an ahistorical lofty state is in essence anti-equality, and attempts to extract the good from the fundamentally bad are attempts of deception. While there are Gandhian politicians/academicians who excessively differentiate Gandhi’s conception of an ideal state from the current trends, it only means that this idealism is confusing and largely interpretative while also being highly remunerative to talk about for the appeal it holds still after 77 years of independence.

This ascetic image of Gandhi is carried by the tokenistic ‘Mahatma.’ The deification of Gandhi, where he is seen as a saint who fasts, meditates, prays, abstains, and lives in an ashram while also providing a stage for people to opine regarding the role of women in public life, capitalism in a developing country, caste relations, the importance of import substitution, the significance of village life of family relationships and tradition, in general, work best in the Indian context. Our modernity isn’t too modern or radically progressive and always finds a place back to the religious to validate any step forward; all that is now scientific predates to a past where it has been discovered but apparently lost.

Gandhian philosophy is of spiritual passive resistance, which is a method of securing rights by personal suffering; it is the reverse of resistance by arms. It requires the use of soul-force over body-force. While the ambit of spirituality can be all encompassing (since it has no specific criteria of inclusion) and helpful, it detaches an individual from the product of a society and historical events. Injury to the self in resistance to the state still forms a criterion of recognizing a protest as valid and non-retaliatory. The figure of Gandhi emerges in resistance to the police while one defends and keeps defending their nature to be non-violent and peaceful. Violent attacks on the state, on the other hand, are deemed consequential and thus not acceptable, deserving a public trial of punishment. 

While it is certainly true that the celebrityhood of Gandhi has been withering, his ideas and philosophies still haunt us. So long as we remain a nation obsessed with religion forming our politics and us conceiving moral Mahatmas in every sphere, the ghosts of Gandhi will long endure.

 

Read Also : Spinning Selfhood : The Story of Gandhi Bhawan, Delhi University

 

Image credits: Pinterest

 

Bhavana Bhaskar

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Features

DUB interviews SFI-AISA candidate for DUSU secretary

By

We spoke to Sneha Aggarwal, a recent graduate from Ramjas College, who is currently a student at Law Faculty, DU. Aggarwal is the candidate of the left-wing alliance between AISA and SFI. She is an SFI member. 

 

Interview took place on September 18, 2024

 

Question: What motivated you to run for the position, knowing the degree of  money-muscle politics?

 

Sneha Aggarwal: Everyone has to face this, those who have any ideological bearings. Money and muscle power have always been a part of student politics but as DU deteriorates and students don’t have any alternatives other than ABVP and NSUI – it shows the need for someone to step up. Being a part of SFI has shown me that you need to be present. 

 

Question: How do you plan on keeping students informed about the union, and taking feedback?

 

Sneha Aggarwal: SFI has always managed to do so with its mass presence and membership with units across 20 colleges. We also don’t use ideology as a filter for members. Our social media presence, and GBMs or general boarding meetings across colleges is how we communicate. 

 

Question: What is the biggest challenge students are facing?

 

Sneha Aggarwal: There are several: fee hike, [lack of] hostel facilities, women’s safety – Union is not representing students’ issues. DU is a central university and a public school, it must continue to  financially alleviate those who cannot afford to do so themselves, DU cannot just be for day-scholar students and the financially privileged 

 

Question: How will you measure the success of your manifesto’s initiatives, if elected? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: If elected, we have a formal platform to put pressure on and communicate with the administration as seen from JNU where we got hostels made and metro paths created

 

Question: Why did you decide to create an alliance [with AISA] this time?

 

Sneha Aggarwal: We saw a similar model of left unity being followed in JNU as well, given the need to contest the right-wing influence. The same process is underway in DU – the ABVP has risen because members of the Sangh have entered the administration due to the government’s favour, even the faculty has been affected –  SFI and AISA have lean to the left, we have a shared ideology, shared goals, and more importantly – a need to counter muscle and money. 

 

Question: NSUI also has a parent national party, the Congress which recently formed the INDIA alliance. Why was the national model of alliance-making not enacted at the  university-level? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: NSUI is already in the union so it has already had an opportunity to represent, which has been inadequate. The use of caste politics or muscle power isn’t just limited to the ABVP, NSUI too is becoming similar. We cannot ally with someone simply on the basis of their national party. 

 

Question: How do you strive to ensure that the students’ demands for hostels are fulfilled without conflict?

 

Sneha Aggarwal: Being in the Union gives formal channels of communication as well as the ability to put pressure [granted student legitimacy]. We intend on pointing out that there is space for expensive student centres and Nescafe kiosks but not for hostels. There is a need to better utilise space and resources. Like the promise of university special buses is only mentioned during elections, citing that there was an unused COVID fund, misuse of money should not happen, there should be a common student union fund. 

 

Question: How does SFI plan to make campus more inclusive for all marginalised groups? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: There are already many SC/ST cells, WDC, queer cells in DU but the issue is functioning. In my alma mater itself, the SC/ST cells were headed by professors who’d make distinctions according to class. Only Miranda’s [College] queer cell is officially recognised. The Union must get these cells recognised and function effectively. Even with the functioning of CASH committees and ICC, they’re responsible for more than just complaints and cases but also effective sensitisation of the student body towards the issue. 

 

Question: Why is your stance anti-FYUP and what alternatives do you propose? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: There are many issues with the implementation of NEP and the four-year programme – they’re imposing the American which only caters to a few who can afford higher education abroad so why four years? Eventually, they’re trying to make it almost compulsory[B.A. programme requirement to qualify for an Honours degree] yet there are multiple entry and exit –  this is simply education commercialised. UGC scrapped education loans and moved towards privatisation as seen with Hindu’s College, where hostels have been leased out to private contractors. We suggest a survey across the country and especially DU, to see which students are dropping out the most and then implement, in order to encourage these communities to finish their degrees. There is also the  SFI policy of NEP 2.0. 

 

Question: Parties like ASA and Fraternity all support identity politics yet they do it as a means of representation and criticise left for fielding mostly upper class candidates, how do we make a choice? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: Many of our left leaders themselves are from marginalised groups – this time there’s many women on the panel from varying backgrounds. But on the matter of identity, there are many such who do contest. Left believes in overall emancipation, not just that of a singular identity. 

 

Question: Was there an attempt to ally with these parties like in JNU? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: We don’t believe in this, this is not our politics. In JNU,  there was a need for the SFI-BAPSA alliance given the right-wing turn. 

 

Question: Is the alliance anti-ABVP or ideologically driven? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: We are driven by our goals — for the students’ needs to be fulfilled, that is our common ground. Our functioning remains different. 

 

Question: The Left is criticised for themselves being hypocritical with their stances, particularly when it comes to internal misogyny? How will you fight these forces? 

 

Sneha Aggarwal: Simply being a communist doesn’t erase patriarchy, given the way society functions and shapes us. This is reality, simply to “de-class” oneself isn’t enough  but must also sensitise oneself. If we make it to the Union, we can only try to self-correct through [constructive] measures but not by boycotting or “cancelling”. The aim is to support growth. 

 

Read Also: Interview with Dr. Abha Dev Habib

 

Image credits: DUB Archive

 

Interviewed by Bhavana and Vedant 

[email protected]

[email protected]

 

Keep Reading
By
Features

DUB interviews DISHA candidate for DUSU president

By

We spoke to Shivam Maurya, a first-year B.Com (Hons.) student at Hindu College, contesting for the post of president from DISHA Students’ Organization, ahead of the DUSU elections scheduled for September 27, 2024. 

 

Question: What in your individual capacity motivated you to contest for election?

Shivam: We come from very far-off to the nation’s biggest university, it is however not how people say it is. We are not being provided with hostels. Looking at fees, you think it’s low but when you have to pay it. My own fee is  Rs. 26,870; it’s too much for a middle-class student.

Question: What do you see as the biggest challenge that students face today?

Shivam: The biggest challenge is anti-student policies. Policies like NEP, FYUP teach students skill-based knowledge so they can do some fixed work for fixed industries. These are designed in a way that disallows lower-class people from coming forward. Seen this way, the most-backward can never make it to the front.

Question: You talk of “merging the student-youth movement with the struggle of the working masses” in your manifesto. How do you interpret this? 

Shivam: Like we have students and working-class individuals, this statement is not for the elite.

Question: Also, what is a ‘common minimum programme’?

Shivam: Common minimum programme reflects common interests and problems of students like fee hikes, hostel accommodation, and (un)employment.

Question: Your manifesto repeatedly refers to the ‘common student’. What is this common student in your understanding? Is every student in DU a common student?

Shivam: At a basic level, every student is a common student. Several students, however, take admission [in DU] to spread propaganda for selfish purposes. Those are in no way common.

Question: The image of Bhagat Singh is your ideological representative, ABVP uses that too. How is it different?

Shivam: For us, Bhagat Singh’s ideology is that of equal education, opportunity, and [equal] treatment of everyone. But as you say ABVP uses Bhagat Singh’s iconography as well but – in a false manner and they throw their pamphlets over roads and use Bhagat Singh to save themselves[for their own political benefit].

Question: How does not being aligned to any party help you during elections? One can see this as a weak ideological position but, how is it a strength? 

Shivam: We have to understand the difference between a political party and a student organisation. If you are aligned to a political party then you represent the party rather than students, like ABVP and NSUI do. Whereas, DISHA represents only students and you think of it as a weakness but it is not a weakness.

Question: SFI and AISA have come into an alliance for left-unity, DISHA can also be ideologically interpreted as a left party. Did you approach them for an alliance?

Shivam: We do not feel it should be ideologically-run as every student who aligns themselves with our common minimum programme is welcome to join DISHA. If we only take someone from a fixed ideology then students of different ideologies are excluded. 

Question: But the way you claim that ABVP-NSUI have a politics of money and muscle, but even their politics come from ideas that are accepted by the masses who elect them to power. Your manifesto claims DISHA has no ideology. Isn’t it a weakness that you don’t have an ideology? 

Shivam: No, it does not mean that we’ll let anyone join the organisation. If someone promotes casteism or hooliganism, we won’t keep them in the organisation as they are violating our common minimum programme. 

Question: Several members of DISHA have often been seen indulging in online debates using heavy terms that might not be accessible to marginalized students who are not familiar with Marxist discourse. This is contrary to your manifesto that states you don’t have an ideology. How far do you think these debates can be stretched in order for them to not reduce to in-fighting?

Shivam: What members of DISHA do, is their own matter. The organisation is isolated from this. 

Question: So, your members’ actions are separate from the organisation?

Shivam: We are concerned as to what they do at the level of the organisation. We can’t interfere in their personal lives.

Question: How does your organisation plan to include students from gender, religious, and caste minorities, LGBTQIIA+ students, and students from economically weaker sections? 

Shivam: We see them all equally. We oppose their oppression but we do not oppress them. They all can come with us and fight and we are with them too.

Question: Systems of power oppress them. For instance, the recent Delhi HC directive about ensuring 50 per cent representation of women in DUSU counters gender oppression. Is DISHA doing anything to ensure this representation and inclusivity?

Shivam: It’s nothing like that. It’s not necessary that only women can understand women’s issues or only Dalits can understand Dalit students’ issues. From time to time, our organisation protests or engages in struggles whenever necessary. As students see us and recognise our struggles, they’ll try to join us.

Question: The DUSU candidates of DISHA are not as publicly visible as other candidates are. This makes mobilization of students difficult as candidates are the face of any organisation. Why so? 

Shivam: We are trying our best but we are unable to gather such a large outreach. 

 

Image Credits: Devesh for DU Beat

 

Read Also: Interview with Dr. Abha Dev Habib

 

Interviewed by Bhavana and Vedant 

[email protected]

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By