The Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) has condemned the new Chief Proctor Office Manual (CPO Manual) today, December 11.
Terming the manual as “dictatorial”, the JNUSU called for it to be taken back.
What is the CPO Manual?
The new CPO Manual, approved and put into effect from November 24, encompasses rules and regulations to be followed during proctorial hearings. The manual outlines three different categories of misconduct and indiscipline and standard operating procedures (SOP), which it says are “based on the experiences accumulated over the year”.
The manual adds that these procedures have been brought out to “suit the changing requirements of proctorial enquiry”, and that these provisions were discussed heavily with committee members before being sent to “officers of the University, proctors and staff of CPO for their feedback”.
The rules mentioned in the manual would apply “to all regular, casual and part-time students” of JNU, irrespective of whether they joined the university before or after the commencement of these rules.
In the foreword to the manual, Prof N Janardhana Raju, Chief Proctor of JNU says, “I have no doubt that the manual is an important document, which provides adequate guidance to all concerned students in the matters pertinent to the day-to-day administration of the CPO.”
The criticism
In a press release, the JNUSU claims that this manual “grants unprecedented power to the Chief Proctor,” which they say “compromises the autonomy of the student community.” This manual was formulated “without any discussion or deliberation with the stakeholders of the university”, i.e. the student community.
The JNUSU points out how certain acts, which are a part of student politics and a “vibrant campus culture” at JNU, are being stifled with strict punishment. Some of these activities are:
Acts of “moral turpitude”, which would lead to a fine of up to Rs 10,000
Wall posters and graffiti, which would lead to expulsion, rustication, eviction from the hostel and/or a fine of Rs 20,000
Holding hunger strikes, dharnas and any form of protest within a 100 m radius of any academic or administrative building would lead to expulsion, rustication, eviction from the hostel and/or a fine of Rs 20,000
Gheraos, sit-ins, and other “forms of coercion” would lead to expulsion, rustication, eviction from the hostel, cancelling of admission and/or a fine of Rs 20,000
Any action that the vice-chancellor or “any other competent authority” considers a violation of discipline and conduct would lead to expulsion, rustication, eviction from the hostel, cancelling of admission and/or a fine of Rs 20,000
In addition, JNUSU alleges that the manual fails to provide clarity on several aspects and terms. This arbitrariness and ambiguity, they say, “leave room for misinterpretation” and “lead to unfair and discriminatory practices, jeopardizing the rights of individual students”.
Moreover, JNUSU also takes issue with how the proctorial hearings now no longer allow cross-examination between the complainants, the witnesses, and the defendant, calling it a “clear opposition to natural justice”. It is important to note that cross-examining all parties in a hearing is an essential practice in all judicial and legal proceedings.
Manual a handbook to stifle student dissent?
The JNUSU says that this manual comes amidst “several academic and infrastructural issues” faced by the student community on campus, such as lack of access to journals, irregular water supply, crumbling hostel buildings, delayed hostel admissions, and shortened semesters.
“Three months ago, JNUSU, along with the hostel presidents in JNU, organised a protest in front of the vice-chancellor’s residence against the frequent water shortage in the hostels. Following the protest, the vice-chancellor addressed the students of the Koyna hostel and told them that the current water supply is all that they get as they pay only Rs 10 as accommodation fees,” says Anagha Pradeep, Councillor, JNUSU.
“Is that how a VC addresses problems faced by students?” Anagha further asks, adding that the vice-chancellor also allegedly told them that the police were looking for students who staged the protest. The hostel presidents who led the protest were also fined, she adds.
This manual, she says, only acts as a way for the administration to suppress any form of student dissent, and political activity, which the university is now synonymous with. “This is especially exemplified in the way postering and graffiti are considered defacement by the administration,” she adds.
“The manual is aimed at stopping any resistance from the student community against the dictatorial farmaans and anti-student policies that the administration has been trying to impose one by one,” JNUSU says in its statement.
The JNUSU also notes how the act of the Proctorial Committee of no longer providing a translation of the security report, which is in Hindi, is an act of Hindi imposition and unfair to students from different linguistic backgrounds who are unfamiliar with the language. “If the students cannot read the security report, how would they understand the gravity of the accusations against them?” Anagha asks.
Partisan punishments and political bias
In addition to being draconian, Anagha believes, the JNU administration would also be extremely partial in the imposition of the CPO Manual. “It has always been the Left students and organisations that faced the brunt of such disciplinary measures,” she says.
She talks about how Swati Singh, a PhD student and former JNUSU Councillor was rusticated unfairly for questioning the guards who had allowed the entry of Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) activists during the admission process, while students from ABVP were able to get away with more egregious actions.
“Last year, ABVP activists got into a scuffle with security personnel and even injured them physically. Despite this, the administration did not act against them. During the CAA/NRC (Citizenship Amendment Act/National Register of Citizens) protests in 2020, Aishe Ghosh, JNUSU President was brutally attacked by ABVP students. There was no action taken against them either,” Anagha elaborates.
In its statement, the JNUSU alleges that the JNU administration has turned the office of the Chief Proctor into a “centre for Political Inquisition”, and has been enacting a “political vendetta against student activists and representatives raising important student community issues”.
The JNUSU urges the student community at JNU to stand united against the CPO Manual, to protect the essence of JNU as “a space that fosters critical thinking, inclusivity, and the fearless pursuit of knowledge”. In addition, the JNUSU also demands that the administration revoke the manual.
“We organised a manual-burning event on Friday, December 8 as a sign of protest against the manual. We are coming up with more strategies to put forth our demand for the complete roll-back of the Manual,” says Anagha.
