Jamia Millia Islamia has agreed to hold student union elections in 2027 after an 18-day hunger strike and weeks of protests by students demanding the restoration of the union, which was dissolved in 2006.
On October 29, the university set May 15, 2027, as the deadline to approve and implement the union constitution. Elections are to be held within six weeks of the start of the next academic session, expected in July 2027. The administration has also agreed to revoke disciplinary action taken against students in connection with the protests.
The students called off their agitation following the announcement. The agreement marks a step towards restoring elected student representation at Jamia, which has gone 20 years without university-wide student union elections.
Why were Jamia students protesting?
The immediate demand was the restoration of the university-wide elected students’ union, which has been absent for two decades. Students wanted a formal representative body through which they could raise concerns with the administration, than relying on departmental associations or individual representations.
The protesters said an elected union would give students a collective voice on issues such as hostel facilities, canteen conditions, fees, infrastructure and administrative decisions. They also wanted a clear electoral timetable, as opposed to assurances that elections would take place at some unspecified point in the future.
The agitation began on October 12, when students launched an indefinite hunger strike and held sit-ins near the statue of Urdu-Persian poet Mirza Ghalib, close to the university’s main entrance. Law student Ebin Basil was among those who continued fasting for 18 days. Other students joined the protest, while some withdrew from the hunger strike because of health concerns.
The administration’s response became a second source of contention. On October 16, Basil was rusticated for a year, while two other students, Jasim Khan and Rehan Haider, were suspended and barred from campus. The university alleged that Basil had participated in an unauthorised sit-in, obstructed staff and disrupted the installation of CCTV cameras. Students and their organisations challenged the disciplinary action and alleged that security personnel had manhandled protesters. These were competing accounts of events on campus.
The protest continued even after the university first agreed to hold elections. Students said the announcement did not specify when the union constitution would be approved, leaving the administration with considerable discretion over when voting could take place.
Why did the first election announcement fail to end the protest?
On October 26, the university announced that elections would be held within 15 days of the approval of the union constitution. It also said suspension orders and show-cause notices issued during the protest would be revoked and that a committee would examine the conduct of security staff.
However, the order did not set a deadline for approving the constitution. Students argued that the administration could delay that approval indefinitely, making the election promise difficult to enforce in practice.
The order also included a condition that protesters issue a public apology for defamatory statements, actions or social media posts against the administration and remove the posts concerned. Protesters objected to the condition, arguing that they should not have to apologise for exercising their right to peaceful protest. They also sought the withdrawal of rustication orders and campus-entry bans, which had not been fully addressed in the initial announcement.
The university subsequently shifted classes and second mid-term examinations online, citing the situation on campus. Security was tightened, and students faced restrictions around the protest site. The disruption affected students who were not participating in the agitation as well, with some expressing concern about missing in-person classes and the broader experience of campus life.
What is the Lyngdoh Committee, and why is it important?
The Lyngdoh Committee was set up following a Supreme Court direction on December 12, 2005, to examine student elections and recommend measures to make them fairer and less vulnerable to violence, excessive spending and political interference. It was headed by former Chief Election Commissioner JM Lyngdoh.
The committee’s recommendations were accepted by the Supreme Court in September 2006, which directed universities across the country to follow them when conducting student elections. The framework was intended to establish common standards for campus polls while allowing institutions some flexibility in how they organise them.
What did the university finally agree to?
The administration issued a revised order on October 29, setting a deadline for the restoration process and addressing the disciplinary action against protesters.
The agreement includes three major commitments:
Union constitution: The JMISU constitution must be approved and implemented by May 15, 2027.
Elections: Polling must take place within six weeks of the commencement of the next academic session, expected around July 16, 2027, in accordance with the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations.
Disciplinary action: Show-cause notices, suspensions, rustications, expulsions and campus-entry restrictions connected to the protest are to be withdrawn or revoked.
Following the revised order, the students called off the agitation and hunger strike. The university also indicated that in-person classes and examinations would resume after the Diwali break, from November 8.