Editorial 1 : Stain on campus
Introduction: University administrations — public and private — across the country have, in recent years, unfortunately not always stood up for academics and students when the latter have questioned the dominant ideas and powers that be.
How free our universities are in terms of freedom of speech?
- Teachers and students have been arrested, discussions, even movie screenings stalled or called off.
- Academics at prestigious private universities that claim to champion liberal values have been forced out and university authorities have not refrained from inviting the police on campus.
- In this milieu, OP Jindal Global University (JGU) seemed to have, quietly and without fuss, created a space even as others in its neighbourhood ceded it.
- However, the JGU administration’s action against two students for “putting up posters and engaging in conversation” that involved “derogatory and provocative words” flies against its own record and stated principles.
- More importantly, it undermines the idea and promise of a university.
- It’s a stain on the campus.
What happened at Jindal Global University?
- The action against the students was in response to posters and discussion on the Ram temple at Ayodhya.
- Reportedly, the framing of the discussion was critical of the dominant politics surrounding the consecration.
- On February 10, the students were suspended for a semester and late that night, they were “evicted” from campus housing.
- According to the university’s Student Disciplinary Committee, the punishment was for “a serious violation of the student code of conduct”.
- This wasn’t a frightened university administration giving in to goons, this was the university punishing free speech.
O P Jindal Global University and the right to criticise
- JGU is an “Institution of Eminence” and, to the credit of its leadership, its law school has been ranked among the top 100 in the world.
- Its faculty includes a former Chief Justice of India, a former SC justice and social scientists.
- They could tell the JGU administration that ideas are tested through debate, and a campus can remain “excellent” only if it allows students to experiment with them.
- After all, a campus is the only place where you have the right to be wrong.
- There’s no evidence that the two students were fomenting violence or breaking a law.
- “At the core of JGU’s vision and mission”, according to its website, “is our aspiration to be a role model for excellence in higher education in India and among the leading universities of the world”.
- It also promises to remain sensitive to the “deepening of democratic traditions in India”.
- The university should revoke the suspensions, ensure that expressing an idea can’t be the reason for students to be evicted from a residential campus.
- Otherwise, JGU’s words on democracy will ring hollow, its global ranking a mere marketing number.
Conclusion: By punishing those who criticize and ask questions, Jindal Global University risks becoming a cautionary tale rather than the role model it aims to be.
Editorial 2 : A constitutional crisis
Introduction: At the inaugural session of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, Governor RN Ravi did not read the text prepared by the state government. Instead, he walked out, as he did the previous year, and later claimed that he did not agree with the remarks prepared by the government of Tamil Nadu.
Governor R N Ravi and controversy
- There have been other instances of Governor Ravi withholding Bills duly passed by the Assembly and even referring these to the President of India.
- Such actions strengthen the argument that the position of the governor has lost its constitutional utility in a modern democratic setup.
Governors’ activism in opposition-ruled states
- There has been an increase in the interference of governors in governance in non-BJP-ruled states.
- Regularly, states like Kerala, Telangana, Punjab, Delhi, and West Bengal have witnessed such constitutional friction, which has ultimately impeded governance.
- Many of these states approached the Supreme Court to seek directions for governors to pass bills in accordance with the constitutional scheme.
- In some cases, such as Telangana, the 2022 assembly session began without the customary Governor's Address.
Governor vs state government in Tamil Nadu
- In the Tamil Nadu legislative assembly, the previous year witnessed a walkout when the chief minister objected to Ravi reading out an unapproved and abridged version of the Governor's Address.
- In this year's session, he staged a similar exit stating that the Address "contained numerous passages with misleading claims and facts" and reading them would amount to "a constitutional travesty"
- The governor's office also released a press communication that stated that the governor had asked for the national anthem to be sung before the commencement of the address but that was not done.
- On the first issue, the state minister for law has explained that the governor had not sought clarification regarding any factual issues.
- Secondly, it is well known in Tamil Nadu that the protocol in official government events is to begin with the Tamil Thai Vazhthu (Tamil anthem) and conclude with the national anthem, which was followed in the present session as well.
- However, without understanding this, the governor seems to be building a case against his state government as if they have a vested agenda against the national anthem.
- Both of these arguments are unsubstantiated and do not behove the constitutional office occupied by Ravi.
Position of Governor in Indian polity
- It is well known that the governor is required by the Constitution to act only in accordance with the aid and advice of the council of ministers and as such, no discretion is provided for in terms of his functions.
- When it comes to the Governor's Address, these are merely curtain raisers for the assembly session, formal statements made on behalf of the state government.
- The role of governors was always envisaged as a bridge between the elected governments at the state and the Union.
- The original idea was presumably that the larger interest of the country would be served better if we had a person with statesmanship beyond partisanship occupying the Raj Bhavan.
- Unfortunately, recent events have led us to think that the actions of various governors have, instead of tying up the loose ends of Union-state relations, caused more damage to the federal fabric of the country.
- Such incidents have revived the necessity to review the role and position of the governor within the constitutional architecture.
- The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the governor has no discretionary power in matters of governance.
- In A G Perarivalan vs State (2022), the Supreme Court called the governor a "short-hand expression for state government".
- When it comes to the withholding of bills passed by the assembly, the Supreme Court has been curt and has essentially cut short the self-proclaimed role of the governor.
- This raises a larger question on the necessity for the governorship as an institution itself.
Conclusion: The state governments are functioning properly with a real executive led by the Chief Minister and the collective responsibility of the council of ministers, in such circumstances the nominal heads’ utility becomes questionable.