Jamia Millia Islamia, one of Delhi’s prominent educational institutions, on Saturday shifted all classes across its courses to online mode until further notice, as tensions escalated between the university administration and students protesting for the restoration of the students’ union.
The decision came amid an indefinite hunger strike, allegations of a crackdown on protesters, and demands for the withdrawal of disciplinary action against students.
Protesters told LiveMint that the administration’s actions are undermining their agitation, while the university has cited the prevailing situation and the need to ensure students’ safety and security as reasons for moving classes online.
The development came on the 13th day of an indefinite hunger strike by five students demanding the restoration of the Jamia Millia Islamia Students’ Union (JMISU), a clear timeline for elections and the revocation of disciplinary action against protesters.
They are also seeking the resignation or removal of the university’s Chief Proctor and Security Advisor.
Speaking exclusively to LiveMint, protesting students said Saturday’s developments had deepened their distrust of the administration, with little clarity, they alleged, on when their demands would be addressed.
“We see this as another way of restricting students amid the ongoing protest,” said Nausheen Farooq, an MSc Disaster Management student at Jamia.
Why are Jamia students protesting?
The agitation, which began on October 12, centres on the demand to restore the students’ union, whose elections have not been held since 2005. The union was dissolved in 2006.
Students argue that an elected representative body is necessary to raise campus-related concerns, represent student interests and hold the administration accountable.
“Our main demand is the re-establishment of the Jamia Students’ Union. Every institution in India has a students’ union, and we are demanding the same for Jamia so that students have a representative who can speak for them,” Farooq told LiveMint.
The protesters have outlined three broad demands: a formal notification specifying a timeline for union elections, the withdrawal of disciplinary action against students, and the resignation or removal of the Chief Proctor and Security Advisor.
Akhil Muhammad, a postgraduate political science student affiliated with the Fraternity Movement, told LiveMint students wanted a firm commitment on elections rather than another administrative process that could prolong the uncertainty.
“We need a clear timeline for the elections, not another process that delays them,” he said.
Students allege early-morning crackdown as tensions escalate
The dispute escalated on 17th October, when students alleged that campus security personnel, accompanied by Delhi Police, forcibly removed the hunger strikers and other students from their protest site.
Muhammad alleged that around 5.30 am, approximately 80 security guards, along with police personnel, arrived at the gates and removed the hunger strikers and around 30 students accompanying them.
According to his account, the campus gates were subsequently closed, libraries were shut and notices were issued. Students gathered outside the main gate later in the morning to protest against the action.
By the afternoon, the gathering had grown, with students attempting to enter the campus, Muhammad said. He said some students managed to get inside after a smaller entrance gate gave way, while police detained protesters who were at the back of the gathering.
The developments followed a meeting between university representatives, including the registrar and professors, and the protesting students.
According to The Indian Express, officials asked the hunger strikers to call off their protest and said a committee had been formed to consider their demands.
The students, however, said the proposed process did not provide the immediate assurances they were seeking.
Why students oppose the proposed drafting committee
Farooq alleged that the administration did not engage directly with the hunger strikers until the ninth day of the protest.
She said a subsequent high-level committee meeting failed to resolve differences over how the students’ demands were recorded.
“The administration was not in contact with the hunger strikers until the ninth day of the protest,” she said, adding that students believed the minutes of the meeting did not accurately reflect the demands they had raised.
She also questioned the administration’s proposal to take two months to form a drafting committee for the students’ union constitution.
“Do we really need two months to form a drafting committee? It can be done within two days,” she said, alleging that the delay could weaken the agitation.
The administration’s position, as reported by The Indian Express, is that a new constitution and a mechanism for conducting elections need to be established before an election schedule can be announced.
A committee has been proposed to draft the union constitution, while protesters insist that a clear timeline for elections must be part of the process.
Suspensions and show-cause notices add to students’ concerns
The protesters are also demanding the withdrawal of disciplinary measures against students involved in the agitation.
Muhammad said one of the hunger strikers, law student Ebin Basil, had been rusticated for a year, while another student had been suspended for six months. He also said show-cause notices had been issued to other students.
Farooq alleged that the administration was issuing notices and imposing campus restrictions on protesters instead of addressing their concerns over detentions.
The students want all disciplinary action linked to the protest revoked and assurances that participants will not face further punitive measures.
Why students say an elected union matters
For the protesters, the dispute goes beyond the immediate question of elections. They argue that the absence of an elected union has left students without a formal representative body through which to raise grievances.
“There is no one to speak for the students right now. At least with a union, we would have a representative from our side who could raise our concerns,” Farooq said.
Muhammad said the protesters were seeking a firm commitment from the administration rather than an open-ended process that could postpone elections further.
The agitation has also unfolded amid a controversy over graffiti bearing the slogan “Free Kashmir” and “Free Sharjeel Imam” on campus.
On the graffiti found on campus, Farooq said the focus was being shifted away from the students’ demand for the restoration of the union, calling it an “attempt to defame the ongoing protest”.
“There are attempts to defame the ongoing protest by pointing to certain slogans. Our demands for the union are being sidelined in the media and by the administration. Our fight is for the restoration of campus democracy, and any attempt to malign this peaceful protest will be rejected. This protest is for the democratic rights of students and stands for the democratic rights of all,” Farooq said.
The university’s decision to move classes online has added another dimension to the standoff. While the administration has cited student safety and the need to maintain academic continuity, protesters view the decision as an additional restriction amid the ongoing agitation.
Mint has reached out to the university administration for a response. This story will be updated if and when a response is received.