Student politics and fundamental rights

Mainul asserted that students should be freed from the command and control of partisan politics, and banning political parties from implanting student fronts on campuses is the way to proceed.

The prohibition should be extended to faculties as well. Government employees' organizations should also have limited involvement in politics in the name of trade unions, to maintain congenial work environment.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

The concern isn't about banning student politics per se; instead it is about defining what constitutes student politics. He acknowledges the pragmatism of student politics for developing future leadership, but argues that students', teachers' and workers' organizations, and professional bodies should be pursuing their own agendas instead of being pawns in the hands of the political parties.

As expected, reactions to the proposal were cynical. Rashed Khan Menon quipped: "Why are they afraid of student politics?" Hasanul Haque Inu cautioned: "Student politics cannot be banned or throttled by making laws. This will backfire."

Tofayel Ahmed said: "Students should be free to pursue politics alongside their studies. If they want to become politicians after graduating, they must be familiar with political activities before leaving campus."

An appropriate riposte to Menon and others would be: "Why are they afraid if academic institutions transform into true learning places?" Noor-e-Alam Siddique, on Channel I, passionately argued that politicians educate their children abroad while recruiting the poor peoples' children to die for their self-aggrandizing agenda at home.

Student politics, instead of being totally banned, should be limited to activities that come within the purview of student government. These activities should envelope students' issues such as academic programs, library facilities, classroom conditions, residential halls, dinning, sporting activities, health and security issues, and everything else related to students welfare.

Student government should organize debates and seminars on national and international issues. Following the models in the US, politically ambitious students may engage in community service, work as interns in local and national government offices (such as election commission) and political party offices, and get academic credits.

Kawser Jamal, a former Dhaka university student activist, and I conducted an informal telephone survey of 27 Bangladeshis, and found that everyone agreed that the above activities constitute student politics.

Since existing academic programs in our universities are not designed to inculcate political aptitude, universities may innovate a special curriculum targeting politically motivated students, following Western models. Without proper education, many politicians are unable to grasp how party politics, public policy, governance, and the country's laws interrelate.

Would Tofayel Ahmed tell me how many promising parliamentarians, and how many scumbags, we've produced from our student politicians since liberation, or from an earlier period?

Many former student leaders, including three barristers from Khaleda Zia's cabinet, are rotting in prison for corruption, and many others served as accomplices to corrupt regimes -- both autocratic and democratic. Just because many haven't been arrested yet, it does not mean that they haven't dirtied their souls with corruption.

Historically, students have played a significant role in many national movements, including the 1952 language movement, the overthrow of Ayub Khan in 1969, the 1971 war of independence, and the 1990 "restore democracy and oust autocrat Ershad from power" movement.

Make no mistake; these movements weren't the exclusive domain of party affiliated students' groups, but rather by all students propelled by patriotic zeal, similar to the rise of student protests across American university campuses against the Vietnam War. But that was then -- we're now a homogenous people in an internet age requiring learning, knowledge, and professional skill to lead the nation.

Since the restoration of democracy in 1991, campus violence has plagued higher education. With easy access to arms, and all encompassing acrimonious politics between AL and BNP, violence on campuses turned deadly.

"Dhaka university elections were treated with such significance by the political parties that they choose the nominees -- not the students," observed a former Vice-Chancellor, Emajuddin Ahmed.

Today's campus politics requires mastering violence, agitation, hooliganism, kidnapping, and so on. Much like trade unions, student organizations promote the political agendas of their affiliated national parties, and often do so under the tutelage of faculty groups.

Student politics today is guided by non-students masquerading as students. Over the last 15 years, many student activists simply mimicked their national leaders' penchant for land-grabbing, extortion, assaulting the media and brutally attacking the opposition.

All these illicit activities tarnished the image of student politics in people's discernment. Today, the quality of graduates, politicians, and civil servants has deteriorated relative to the pre-liberation period. Consequently, overwhelming public opinion has been swayed in favour of abolishing student politics altogether.

This interim government isn't the first to challenge what constitutes campus politics. Shortly after assuming office in 1996, President Shahabuddin Ahmed, while meeting Bangladesh's political leaders declared: "Students have no fundamental right to do politics on the campus."

Student politics in Bangladesh universities had a close parallel across the state of Kerala, India, prior to 2004. Here, college elections were more important than studies. There were times when college campuses exploded in deadly violence, resulting in death of students. The colleges then get shutdown, and classes are lost.

In one incident, a student, when barred from taking an exam for lack of required attendance, sued the college for monetary and emotional damages.

A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, on February 20, 2004, directed the state government and universities to lay down rules and regulations for curbing dharnas, strikes, gheraos and demonstrations by various students' organizations on college campuses (The Hindu, February 21, 2004).

The court observed that collective bargaining, strike, dharnas, agitation and absenteeism were alien to the academic realm. These were "weapons used by the labour force for establishing their demands under the labour laws, and they are not academic tools to be used against the teaching faculty, or against the management, to vindicate the rights of the students."

The court said that the educational institutions could lay down a code of conduct and guidelines to be enforced by the principals. The students were bound by the code of conduct, and the students' organizations had no legal right to interfere with the fundamental right guaranteed to managements.

Despite the initial protests, the ban on student politics has worked miracles. "There are no political activities, no party-based elections, no union chairman or officials, and no loss of academic days in Sacred Heart College anymore," declared Prof. PM.

Sebastian, Head of the English department. "We are happy, and so are the students," he reiterated. (The Hindu, Jan 28, 2006).

Dr. Abdullah A Dewan is Professor of Economics at Eastern Michigan University.