[Note: Before proceeding, I should situate myself: I studied Literature at AMU between 2015–2018 and lived in one of its hostels. This is not to claim privileged insight, but to underline that my reflections come from lived proximity rather than distant observation.]

The recently aborted student protest at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU)—ostensibly about reviving the Students’ Union (AMUSU) rather than resisting the fee hike—offers a troubling yet instructive window into the nature of campus politics at AMU.

A Legitimate Beginning

At the outset, it must be remembered that the agitation began on a legitimate plank: the arbitrary and unjustified fee hike. For many students from modest backgrounds, AMU’s subsidized education is their only ladder to upward mobility. Their resistance was therefore natural and justified. The protest was marked by determination and—crucially—visible leadership from female students who camped at Bab-e-Syed. Their resilience forced the administration to roll back the hike to 20%.

But soon, the focus shifted.

The Twist

Before engaging with this shift, a brief background is essential. AMUSU—short for Aligarh Muslim University Students’ Union—was, in principle, meant to bridge the administration and the student community by offering effective representation. In practice, however, its history paints a sorry picture.

Supporters romanticise AMUSU as a “nursery for leadership,” pointing to names like Azam Khan and Arif Mohammad Khan. Yet, since 2017, when the University suspended it on the flimsy pretext of law and order, AMU has remained without an elected student body. The suspension was arbitrary and undemocratic, contradicting the very spirit of a university as a space for debate, dissent, and contrarian thought.

Reality, however, diverges sharply from the romanticism. Over the past decade, AMUSU has drifted far from its founding purpose. Most office-bearers—barring rare exceptions—have been academic underperformers or regional strongmen who treated the Union as a launchpad for failed political careers or as a network for contracts, patronage, and admissions. Regionalism thrived through collusion with faculty members from their own provinces, while the welfare of the broader student body remained a mere veneer. Unsurprisingly, AMUSU enjoys little respect among ordinary students.

Against this backdrop, the fee hike protest had nothing to do with AMUSU elections. Yet, seeing a readymade platform for mobilization, the AMUSU lobby opportunistically inserted itself. For a few days, they kept the rollback of fees as the visible agenda and AMUSU revival as a secondary one. But when their chances dimmed, anxiety set in. Their desperation

was rooted in past failures—one prominent activist had even approached the Supreme Court with a contempt petition citing the Lyngdoh Committee, only to have it dismissed in July 2025, a fact he concealed from fellow students. With the fee protest gaining momentum, the lobby saw its golden chance: a mass movement they could never build on their own was suddenly available to hijack.

How AMUSU Aspirants Hijacked the Fee-Hike Protest

Sections of students who had long lobbied for AMUSU elections—despite lacking credibility among peers—seized the protest as a platform to advance their agenda. History shows that AMUSU has ceased to represent students in any meaningful sense. Much like Ambedkar’s critique of Indian villages as “sink of localism, a den of ignorance, narrow mindedness, caste and communalism,” AMUSU has degenerated into a den of factionalism, patronage, and regressiveness.

Rather than critiquing, confronting and exposing systemic issues—declining academic standards, nepotistic faculty and administrative recruitments, inbreeding in admissions, or entrenched elites’ dominance—the AMUSU camp staged hunger strikes and moral dramas, allegedly under the blessings of a Law professor and the Eastern UP faction. These theatrics were less about student welfare and more about arm-twisting the administration.

Gender Insensitivity and Hypocrisy

Equally glaring is the hypocrisy. The same AMUSU hopefuls who now cloak themselves in the language of student rights were absent when female students were mishandled by the Proctorial team during protests over electricity shortages. Their selective silence exposes a deep gender insensitivity. Worse, when the fee hike protesters—mostly girls—refused to be co-opted, they were abused, branded “dalals,” and smeared on social media.

A movement that cannot respect women within its own ranks stands discredited- and rightly so.

The Deal with the Administration: Regional Politics at Play

Perhaps the most disturbing development was the timing of the administration’s assurance to the hunger striker: elections in December, after semester exams. This timing was no coincidence. By then, most outstation students—from Bihar, Bengal, the Kerala, and Kashmir

—would have left, leaving the electoral field to Western UP students and their Azamgarh allies.

Why not hold elections in August–September, when all students are present? Neither the administration nor the hunger striker offered a convincing answer. Their silence reeks of sub- regional opportunism.

What Went Off the Agenda?

Equally telling is what disappeared from the protesters led by hunger striker’s list of demands:

1. School fee hikes—despite RTE 2009 and the active role of Ahmadi School students— were quietly dropped, even though they had kept Centenary Gate closed till 19 August
2. Administrative accountability—the demand for replacing the Proctor, Director (Schools), and Controller of Exams was abandoned. The moment students pressed for the removal of the long-serving ad hoc Controller (a local appointee with entrenched clout), the entire protest was abruptly called off before sunrise on 19

This sequence exposes the deeper malaise: protests shaped less by genuine grievances than by the compulsions of entrenched elites.

The Larger Picture: Opportunism of the Muslim Elite

This episode raises uncomfortable questions not only about AMU but about India’s Muslim elites more broadly:

1. Why do entrenched cliques, clouts, lobbies monopolize university offices and student bodies?
2. Why is regional dominance—particularly of Western UP and Azamgarh—normalized, while voices from other provinces are systematically muted?

• Why do organizations like SIO or IYF remain silent on nepotism, gender insensitivity, or ad hoc appointments, yet selectively speak up when AMUSU’s revival is at stake?

The answer is crude opportunism. These elites are less invested in reform than in safeguarding their own hegemony.

Conclusion

The August 2025 AMU protests reveal a painful truth: genuine student concerns—fee hikes, gender justice, transparent governance, fair examinations—were eclipsed by the opportunism of a narrow faction bent on reviving AMUSU for self-interest.

The December election timeline, the abandonment of school fee issues, the silence on the ad hoc   appointments of high administrative officers/directors that too from within the internal teachers , and the abuse of female protesters expose the agitation for what it was: a cynical power       play.   Far      from sacrifice,               the    hunger    strike    was    political theatre. And the administration, complicit through opaque bargains, stands equally discredited.

In the end, one is left asking: was this agitation ever meant to empower students, or was it always designed to pressure the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which heard the case of VC’s appointed on 18 August 2025; the Petitioners, too, in the said case are insiders; and protect sub-regional dominance?

The anatomy of this protest leaves little doubt: AMUSU and the AMU administration mirror each other’s failures. Together, they embody what is wrong with entrenched elite politics of Muslims—visionless, opportunistic, and hostile to the aspirations of common students.

(The author of this article known to the Editors chooses to remain anonymous)

The post Power, Patronage, and Protest: The Making of AMUSU’s Opportunism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On December 15, however, AMU students had not planned a protest but a solidarity march to stand with students of Jamia Milia Islamia University in Delhi who had been subjected to ‘state sponsored’ violence by the police.
 

As per the report here’s how the protests at AMU unfolded:

On December 8, students held peaceful protest and set copies of the Citizenship (Amendment) Billon fire.

On December 9, the AMU students held talks against the bill at the Lawns of Kennedy Auditorium

Between December 10 to December 12, there were peaceful protests, lectures were organised, there was a mass hunger strike by 28,000 students and many protest meetings were held.

On 13th December 2019, AMU Students Union led a Mega Protest Rally attended by over 10,000 students whereby they marched towards the District Magistrate’s office with a memorandum addressed to the CJI, ArvindBobdeasking him to take cognisance of Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019.

December 15 onwards, the University was turned into a police garrison and a massive crackdown was unleashed on the students which was allowed by the University administration in the know-how of the Vice Chancellor of the University. The hostels within the University were forcibly vacated and sealed, internet was shut down and the university was turned into a war zone. The University was declared shut from December 15 onwards due disturbances created by some “anti-social elements” said the notice issued by the University.

On December 15, the students were gathering to stand on solidarity with the students of JMI, Delhi and to condemn the acts of police brutality unleashed on the JMI students. There was only sloganeering, no body from the University administration reached out to the students’ union to warn against anti-social elements. There were non-student faces who infiltrated in the protests, they were wearing masks and were aged over 40.
 

The police brutality

The report also denied reports of stone pelting done by students citing Hindi newspapers reporting that AMU campus has been cleaned and no stones or bricks are on the road sides. So, massive stone pelting from the campus was simply impossible. 

The report confirms that police used tear gas, pellet guns, pistols, rifles, stun grenades. The police used abusive language, religious slurs and there are videos showing ruthless beating of students above waist height and RAF (Rapid Action Force) personnel pointing guns at male students.

The AMUSU president was hit at his chest to prevent him from leading the protests and ensuring that the same remain peaceful, as he has been successful in doing so in the past. The CMO of Trauma Centre of JNMCH (Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College and Hospital) refused to send ambulances to AMU as the Proctor of the University had directed him to do so. Yet, the head of JNMC Resident Doctors’ Association managed to arrange 16 ambulances to be sent to the university which managed to save many lives of the students. 

Police unleashed extreme brutality on not just the students; they damaged university property, students’ property on campus, ambulance drivers, medical professionals (including Dr. Kashif, Secretary Resident Doctors Association), AMU employees and many of the AMU gate keepers were hurt, one ICU ambulance was also vandalised.

Police even entered premises where students were in fact hiding from them, such as Aftab Hall, and fired tear shells and sound shell in the room which forced the insiders to vacate the room after which they were mercilessly beaten which has been caught on CCTV, and were thereafter detained.

The image below is of a hostel room, set on fire by police
 

Image Courtesy: the AMUSU report
 

Image Courtesy: the AMUSU report

The police, reportedly, ‘tortured whoever came their way’. They broke into toilets and beat up students hiding from police, with rods and gun butts, they were abused, forced to recite Jai Shri Ram, were abused with words like Pakistani, Deshdrohi (traitor), attankwadi (terrorist), anti-national.

Some images reported by news media clearly show use of brute force and firing within campus.

Image courtesy: the AMUSU report

Testimonies of students

The report also includes testimonies from students wherein there are horrid stories of a student from Jammu and Kashmir who was tied to a tree and beaten up, was called a Pakistani and was kept in a dark room through the night.

Another student who was dragged out of a toilet and beaten not just within campus but also when taken to Malkan Singh Hospital, he was beaten with belts, was denied food for the night and was kept in jail with 9 people in a room that had a capacity for 5. He was later taken to the hospital and was forced to sign on a piece of paper, the contents of which are unknown.

Another student who was running away from the violence was hit by a stun grenade. He lost his dominant hand and in his other hand, he lost 4 fingers.

There are many more stories like these, more than 100 injured students left the JNMC hospital for the fear of profiling and reprisal from police. More than 50 students booked under various sectionsof the Indian Penal Code.

Complicity of University Authorities, demands of students

The report clearly states that the VC, Tariq Mansoor and the registrar, Abdul Hamid were highly complicit with the police and the state and failed to protect the students of a University which is older than India’s independence and the AMUSU has demanded the resignation of both these people in power.

The report, in culmination, called upon the teachers of the University to take account of the number of the students injured, number of students detained and loss caused to property of the University, to form a legal team to assist lawyers in pursuing cases of AMU students and to prepare a comprehensive and detailed report on the events that unfolded in the university.

The report even called upon the President of India, who is the Visitor to the University to visit the campus and meet students who were subjected to state sponsored violence. The report also demanded a High-Profile Enquiry by the sitting judge of Supreme Court of India in the 15th December State Sponsored Violence at AMU; immediate restoration of university functioning and academic activity; immediate revocation of farcical charges against AMU Students and registration of FIR, among other things.

The AMUSU, through the report declared that their protest will continue and they will continue to reject NRC and CAA.

The entire report can be read here.

The post Undeterred, AMUSU releases Ground Report detailing police brutality on students appeared first on SabrangIndia.