The Mayawati Government in Uttar Pradesh has banned the students’ union elections in the universities and colleges of the state. According to her, these non-academic activities were vitiating the atmosphere in the campuses. Also, they were creating law-and-order problems. Yes, the campuses not only in UP but across the country have been witnessing, owing to students’ elections, chaotic disturbances in academic schedules, violence and bloodshed. Examinations postponed, sine die closures and zero years have also become common.

For a variety of reasons we may justify the UP Government’s orders. First, most of the students who fight elections are not students. They join the colleges for the express purpose of promoting some political party and its interests. The recent elections in Delhi university in which all the seats were won by the NSUI is an example. The victors’ photographs were published with Sonia Gandhi in the middle.

In student elections in Central Universities, we have been witnessing, year after year, a show of money and muscle power. This year, as against the legally prescribed ceiling of Rs 4000 per student, the campaigning in Delhi consumed about Rs 40 lakh. The Supreme Court took cognisance of this and advised the university to strictly enforce the Lyngdoh Committee Recommendations.

As a former teacher of Delhi University I had been associated with elections for many years. I cannot forget how my own students indulged in hooliganism. Beyond being sorry for loss of academic work we couldn’t do anything. Enforcing the minimum attendance criteria, the age bar and the candidates’ academic performance was a hard nut to crack.

This means that student politics is not what it was originally meant to be. As most college students are now voters in the state and national elections, their political ambitions have risen. In September 2006 the Supreme Court had banned the use of money and muscle. It had said the academic scenario must not be polluted by these. The court has now sought a status report from the Solicitor General on the implementation of the Lyngdoh report. Accordingly, it is likely to be brought for hearing on October 29, 2007.

Unfortunately, the academia is not yet fully aware of the Committee’s recommendations. Not to talk of students’ unions, even teachers on election duty are not given any guidelines. Very few know that students with any previous conviction, or funded by any political party, cannot contest, nor can they spend more than Rs 5000. Also, they must have a minimum of 75 per cent attendance and maximum age limit from 25 to 28 respectively for undergraduates and post-graduates.

To fight a college election or for a parliamentary seat is students’ fundamental right. In colleges they have the right to form their associations. But they must use their post for the improvement of the academic atmosphere. They must keep an eye on any injustice being done by the authorities and monitor that classes are being regularly held.

Yet, the remedy is not in the banning of the elections or the abolition of their union. This would not be accepted in the present social-educational scenario. Only, stop the mainstream political parties from interfering. And, as the Court says, “let the students be students first and leaders later”.... but, unfortunately, “They are full-time leaders and part-time students.”