Jamia students reject conditional election assurance, two continue hunger strike

After 14 days of agitation, the university has promised polls 15 days after the approval of a union constitution, but offers no deadline for that approval and demands a public apology from protesters
Image: english.fikrokhabar.com

The struggle for the restoration of a democratically elected students’ union at Jamia Millia Islamia is far from over. On Monday, October 26, even as the university administration issued an order promising elections within 15 days of the approval of a new union constitution, two students, Ebin Basil and Rehan Khan, refused to call off their hunger strike, maintaining that the administration had failed to address their core demands.

The order, issued by the Office of the Registrar, came after nearly a fortnight of sustained protests, hunger strikes, police deployment, detentions and mounting pressure from students and supporters across university campuses. A day before, the students were also alleged assaulted by police officers. Yet, instead of bringing the agitation to a close, its conditional terms have deepened the impasse.

According to the notice, the university has agreed to hold elections 15 days after the constitution is approved, revoked suspension and show-cause notices issued during the protest, and promised an inquiry into the conduct of security personnel. However, the order also requires protesting students to publicly apologise for alleged defamatory remarks and actions against the administration and remove related social media posts. For the protesting students, the central problem remains unresolved: the administration has offered no definite deadline for drafting and approving the constitution, leaving the election schedule contingent on a process with no specified completion date.

In view of the same, Ebin Basil and Rehan Khan would continue their hunger strike after students rejected all three points in the October 26 order. The students alleged that they had been pressured into signing an agreement at around 3 am, with the university’s conditions failing to provide the assurances they had sought. The demand for the resignation of Vice-Chancellor Mazhar Asif and Chief Proctor has also not been addressed. While two hunger strikers are continuing their fast, Jasim Khan and Faizan are expected to discontinue theirs because of their medical conditions, according to the account shared by Mufti.

The administration’s order thus offers a partial response to the agitation while leaving crucial questions about accountability, disciplinary action and the timeline for restoring elected student representation unanswered.

A campus increasingly marked by restrictions

The announcement followed two weeks of escalating tension on campus, with the administration and security personnel repeatedly attempting to contain the agitation. As reported by The Indian Express, Sunday, October 25, saw more than 500 students gather in support of the protest amid a heavy security deployment. Students alleged that access to the protest site, the library and the canteen had been restricted, while university gates were closed and students were prevented from entering the campus. Security personnel from the Delhi Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Central Industrial Security Force and Indo-Tibetan Border Police were deployed in and around the university.

 

The administration had shifted classes online on October 24, citing the prevailing situation and the need to ensure students’ safety. The move came amid allegations that protesters were being prevented from accessing campus facilities and that security personnel had attempted to dismantle their protest arrangements.

On Saturday, students alleged that a university delegation had attempted to dismantle their tents and take hunger strikers to hospital against their wishes. The five students on hunger strike subsequently moved into the Department of Political Science and locked themselves inside to prevent their removal.

The tensions intensified further on October 25, when students attempting to reach the protest site reportedly climbed campus walls, some of which were topped with metal spikes and rods. Students continued to organise marches and raise slogans despite the restrictions. The agitation also drew attention to allegations that access to food and water had been obstructed. By the time the administration issued its order on Monday, concerns about the physical condition of the hunger strikers had become increasingly urgent. Jasim Khan’s health deteriorated during the protest, and he was taken to hospital on the 14th night before returning to campus in the early hours of Monday, according to accounts of the agitation.

Students also alleged that they were dragged by police.

 

 

A promise of elections without a deadline

Jamia students began their agitation on October 11, with the hunger strike commencing on October 12, demanding the restoration of the Jamia Millia Islamia Students’ Union (JMISU), a definite election schedule and the withdrawal of disciplinary action against protesters. They also called for the removal of the university’s Chief Proctor and Security Advisor, citing the treatment of students during the agitation.

The union has remained defunct since 2006, with the last elections held in 2005. Nearly two decades without an elected students’ body have left successive batches of students without a formal representative platform to raise campus-wide grievances.

As The Indian Express reported on October 26, students had repeatedly rejected the administration’s position that a new constitution must first be drafted before elections can be scheduled. They argued that the constitution-drafting process should not become an indefinite obstacle to restoring the union and had sought elections by November 30.

The university, meanwhile, maintained that the process required the drafting of a constitution, preparation of electoral rolls and the subsequent announcement of an election date. An official told The Indian Express that the process could not be rushed after a gap of almost 20 years, particularly in view of the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations and changes in applicable University Grants Commission regulations.

The students, however, maintained that the administration had not offered a concrete, time-bound commitment. They cited the Supreme Court’s 2006 judgment in University of Kerala v. Council of Principals, Colleges, Kerala and the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations in support of their demand for a clear electoral roadmap.

The October 26 order has not resolved this dispute. By tying the election date to the approval of the constitution, without specifying when that approval must take place, the administration has left the most important deadline dependent on its own future decisions.

Detailed report may be read here.

Disciplinary action and apology demand fuel discontent

The order also addresses disciplinary action initiated during the agitation, but students have questioned the scope of the relief offered. While suspension and show-cause notices issued during the protest are to be revoked, protesters have pointed out that the order does not clearly guarantee the unconditional withdrawal of all disciplinary measures, including rustication and campus bans.

Ebin Basil, a third-year law student who has been among the hunger strikers, told The Indian Express that the order failed to address the position of students who had been rusticated or barred from campus. He also questioned the demand that protesters publicly apologise for their criticism of the administration. The apology clause has emerged as another major point of contention. The university has required students to issue a public apology at a press conference for alleged defamatory statements, actions or social media posts directed against the administration. The posts are to be removed immediately, with compliance monitored by the university.

Students have rejected this condition, arguing that their agitation was a peaceful campaign for democratic representation and accountability. Their refusal to apologise reflects a broader disagreement over the administration’s handling of dissent and its attempt to make the withdrawal of the protest conditional on public expressions of contrition.

The university has also directed that the agitation be called off immediately. But the continued hunger strike by Ebin and Rehan demonstrates that the written order has not secured the consent of all the protesters.

Protest draws political support, detentions and an FIR

The Jamia agitation has expanded beyond the immediate question of student elections, drawing support from political representatives, former students and university communities across the country.

Congress MP Imran Masood was detained by Delhi Police after visiting the protesting students, while Samajwadi Party MP Mohibbullah Nadvi alleged that police had pushed and manhandled him before detaining him as he travelled to meet the protesters. Nadvi was subsequently released.

The university also lodged a complaint against Congress MPs Imran Masood and Imran Pratapgarhi over their entry into the campus, leading to an FIR over allegations of trespass and related conduct, as reported by The Indian Express and other media outlets. The MPs had visited amid the ongoing agitation and demands for the restoration of the union and withdrawal of disciplinary action.

The struggle continues

The university’s October 26 order marks a significant development after 14 days of sustained agitation, but it does not signal the end of the confrontation. The absence of a fixed deadline for approving the union constitution, uncertainty over the full withdrawal of disciplinary action and the demand for a public apology remain central points of disagreement.

The administration has asked the students to end their protest and warned of legal action if they fail to vacate the protest site. According to Moneycontrol, the Registrar said the university would issue a formal notice giving protesters 30 minutes after 9 am to disperse, citing the undertaking signed by the students.

But Ebin Basil and Rehan Khan have continued their hunger strike, refusing to accept an order they believe falls short of their demands. Their position underscores the gap between the administration’s announcement and the protesters’ insistence on clear, enforceable commitments.

Related:

Books Under Siege: Bengal’s Left bookstalls, the Calcutta High Court’s intervention and the warning from Hitler’s Germany

Seeking justice for Ankita Bhandari, parents detained in pre-dawn crackdown at India Gate

Mumbai Police detain Ambedkarite leaders demanding justice for Sahil Wakode; IIT Bombay refuses to hear delegation

Calcutta High Court says political dissent must not be stifled, directs police to protect CPI(M) bookstall near Durga Puja Pandal

 

Trending

IN FOCUS

Related Articles

ALL STORIES

ALL STORIES