JNU action on Feb 2016 "anti-national" slogans: Dubbed farce, authorities "rusticate" non-student from varsity

Umar Khalid, Kanhaiya Kumar

Counterview Desk

A high-level enquiry committee (HLEC) set up by the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) to look into allegations of “anti-national” slogans raised at a protest held on campus in February 2016, has upheld the recommendation to rusticate student leaders Umar Khalid and Anirban Bhattacharya, who were arrested in a sedition case, but set free on bail. It imposed a fine on Kanhaiya Kumar to the tune of Rs 10,000 for participating in the event.
In a tweet, Khalid said, "Just got to know that Anirban has also been rusticated from JNU for a semester from July 2018-Jan 2019. Now, the fun part is he ceased to be a JNU student in 2016. How do u rusticate a person who has already left? Put him on a time machine? Such a High Level farce, this enquiry".

In a statement he issued earlier, Khalid said he would challenge the decision:

Once again, the BJP and its paid pipers in the media are ecstatic in their portrayal of the students in JNU as “criminals.” With the pretext of the recent order of the farcical “High Level” enquiry (read drama) of the JNU administration, they are claiming that their fiction has been “validated”.

I want to state categorically, that we are all being targeted in a systematic and a malafide manner by an enquiry that was prejudiced against us from day one. An administration that has been running at the orders of the ruling BJP and the RSS, was at no point of time in a position of impartiality to conduct this enquiry.
The court has repeatedly found faults with the enquiry process and has vindicated our apprehensions. This is the third time in the last two years that the administration has come up with a ‘rustication’ order against me in this case – an order that has been twice set aside by the courts. We once again reject this farce of an enquiry along with its findings and verdict. It is against all principles of natural justice and is riddled with contradictions, lies and malice which will soon be exposed again.

We will once again challenge this in court. And we will continue our struggle against such vindictive witch-hunt of any and every voice of dissent in universities across the country. This recent order of the HLEC in JNU is in line with the pattern of the administration’s high-handedness and selective targeting of opposing voices in the student community who against all odds have refused to kneel in the face of despotism.
But alongside, I also wish to take the opportunity to add a bit more here. Yes, we have been student activists in JNU raising our voice against the arrogance of power under the Modi regime and against the manifold injustices in society. But alongside we have also been students who have pursued our academics seriously over the years.

And the two are not exclusive of each other. Our politics also reflects in our academic pursuit and vice versa. Both relate to the rights of the most marginalised in our society. As the ones studying in a public funded university with taxpayers money, we have a certain sense of responsibility towards our society.
My own PhD is on the socio-economic deprivation and political marginalisation of the tribals since colonial times. It is rather ironical that the same regime that says that students are non-serious about their studies in JNU is today hellbent upon stopping us from submitting our PhDs that have been the products of rigorous research, passion and criticality.

They have conjured this HLEC order just two weeks before the deadline of our final submission which is shameful and rabidly vindictive. It is symptomatic of their larger assault on public funded education, on research on social justice and on criticality. However, we want to assure them that we shall not lie low.
Faced with rampant joblessness; faced with the wrath of the farmers, workers and the youth; faced with the limits of their communal, casteist and divisive politics – it is clear that the Modi government is failing miserably and their lies lay exposed. Therefore, once again they are desperately trying to rake up farcical binaries and fictitious enemies today through its propaganda machinery.

There will be more such jumlas, assaults, fictitious “conspiracies,” arrests and media witch-hunt in the run-up to the elections in 2019. And the desperation only shows the fear and weakness of a government that has terribly failed the nation and its people.

***

In a separate statement, the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union has said: “Even after two years of the incident, the Delhi police could not file a charge sheet against JNU students. This decision of the committee is nothing but a gross misuse of power. The committee’s punishments have been set aside by the Delhi High Court twice in the past. We are looking into all legal remedies to overturn this order as well.”

Comments

From Kerala to Bangladesh: Lynching highlights deep social faultlines

By A Representative The recent incidents of mob lynching—one in Bangladesh involving a Hindu citizen and another in Kerala where a man was killed after being mistaken for a “Bangladeshi”—have sparked outrage and calls for accountability.

Gram sabha as reformer: Mandla’s quiet challenge to the liquor economy

By Raj Kumar Sinha* This year, the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj is organising a two-day PESA Mahotsav in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, on 23–24 December 2025. The event marks the passage of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA), enacted by Parliament on 24 December 1996 to establish self-governance in Fifth Schedule areas. Scheduled Areas are those notified by the President of India under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for a distinct framework of governance recognising the autonomy of tribal regions. At present, Fifth Schedule areas exist in ten states: Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Telangana. The PESA Act, 1996 empowers Gram Sabhas—the village assemblies—as the foundation of self-rule in these areas. Among the many powers devolved to them is the authority to take decisions on local matters, including the regulation...

MG-NREGA: A global model still waiting to be fully implemented

By Bharat Dogra When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MG-NREGA) was introduced in India nearly two decades ago, it drew worldwide attention. The reason was evident. At a time when states across much of the world were retreating from responsibility for livelihoods and welfare, the world’s second most populous country—with nearly two-thirds of its people living in rural or semi-rural areas—committed itself to guaranteeing 100 days of employment a year to its rural population.

When a city rebuilt forgets its builders: Migrant workers’ struggle for sanitation in Bhuj

Khasra Ground site By Aseem Mishra* Access to safe drinking water and sanitation is not a privilege—it is a fundamental human right. This principle has been unequivocally recognised by the United Nations and repeatedly affirmed by the Supreme Court of India as intrinsic to the right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. Yet, for thousands of migrant workers living in Bhuj, this right remains elusive, exposing a troubling disconnect between constitutional guarantees, policy declarations, and lived reality.

Policy changes in rural employment scheme and the politics of nomenclature

By N.S. Venkataraman* The Government of India has introduced a revised rural employment programme by fine-tuning the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which has been in operation for nearly two decades. The MGNREGA scheme guarantees 100 days of employment annually to rural households and has primarily benefited populations in rural areas. The revised programme has been named VB-G RAM–G (Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin). The government has stated that the revised scheme incorporates several structural changes, including an increase in guaranteed employment from 100 to 125 days, modifications in the financing pattern, provisions to strengthen unemployment allowances, and penalties for delays in wage payments. Given the extent of these changes, the government has argued that a new name is required to distinguish the revised programme from the existing MGNREGA framework. As has been witnessed in recent years, the introdu...

Rollback of right to work? VB–GRAM G Bill 'dilutes' statutory employment guarantee

By A Representative The Right to Food Campaign has strongly condemned the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–GRAM G) Bill, 2025, describing it as a major rollback of workers’ rights and a fundamental dilution of the statutory Right to Work guaranteed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). In a statement, the Campaign termed the repeal of MGNREGA a “dark day for workers’ rights” and accused the government of converting a legally enforceable, demand-based employment guarantee into a centralised, discretionary welfare scheme.

Aravalli at the crossroads: Environment, democracy, and the crisis of justice

By Rajendra Singh* The functioning of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change has undergone a troubling shift. Once mandated to safeguard forests and ecosystems, the Ministry now appears increasingly aligned with industrial interests. Its recent affidavit before the Supreme Court makes this drift unmistakably clear. An institution ostensibly created to protect the environment now seems to have strayed from that very purpose.

'Structural sabotage': Concern over sector-limited job guarantee in new employment law

By A Representative The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has raised concerns over the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (VB–G RAM G), which was approved during the recently concluded session of Parliament amid protests by opposition members. The legislation is intended to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

Making rigid distinctions between Indian and foreign 'historically untenable'

By A Representative Oral historian, filmmaker and cultural conservationist Sohail Hashmi has said that everyday practices related to attire, food and architecture in India reflect long histories of interaction and adaptation rather than rigid or exclusionary ideas of identity. He was speaking at a webinar organised by the Indian History Forum (IHF).

Search This Blog