Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has been in the news for exerting suppressive actions upon students and faculty since February last year. But this time, the JNU Teachers’ Association (JNUTA) is in action and has launched a public trial against the administration. Vice-chancellor Jagadesh Kumar has been cornered by the teachers for questioning on what he has been doing since he took charge as V-C of the university.

JNUTA filed a chargesheet on October 17 against the V-C and the “accused” was given the deadline of three days to respond to the allegations against him. As the deadline got over and the V-C failed to respond either verbally or in a written format, the public inquiry against him commenced from October 23.

A proper plan for a five-day trial has been charted out by JNUTA at the Sabarmati lawns, one of the popular dhabhas of JNU. Since the V-C has time and again ignored teachers’ opinions in all democratic meetings, including academic council and executive committee meetings, the trial is a mode of protest by the faculty and perhaps the only way left for them to march on.

In a statement issued by JNUTA, the teachers said: “The JNUTA public inquiry against the vice-chancellor of JNU is a mode of protest modelled on an official inquiry but deriving its legitimacy not from the powers vested in any statutory authority but by being an expression of collective sentiment of teachers of JNU.”

It has been a long-standing grievance of the student and teacher community of JNU that the V-C does not pay heed to their opinions; rather he tries to subdue and ignore them. All decision-making bodies are being toppled and monopolised by him, leaving no room for the suggestions and views of others, they say, pointing out that all meetings have become a token practice as real decision-making power rests with the V-C himself.

It is in this context that the public inquiry is not only being seen as important but also the need of the hour. It is a platform where teachers can clearly and openly put forward their views along with written documents to back their arguments.

In the course of trial, a group of panellists consisting of prominent JNU faculty will listen to the allegations and make a decision in a written format, which will be translated into a final verdict on the last day. In each hearing, the teachers will present their case and it would be followed by preliminary observations from panellists who would present their views before giving the final judgment.

It has been suggested by JNUTA that the public inquiry would help in addressing and giving a comprehensive picture of different issues. Therefore, the inquiry is not biased or one-sided – rather an attempt has been made to give space to arguments of the administration as well. This is done primarily for the convenience of the public which might be unaware of the views of the other side.

The charges that have been mentioned against the V-C in the past two days are divergent. Repeated violation of statutory provisions and obligations, undermining of institutions like the Gender Sensitisation Committee against Sexual Harassment (GSCASH), callous attitude towards the case of missing student Najeeb Ahmed, undermining faculty selection process, tampering with reservation policies, etc. are some of the allegations against him.

In most of the above cases, the V-C has taken his own independent stand that was strongly resisted by the JNU community, but to no avail. Also, new rules have already been brought into effect as suggested by the V-C. For instance, despite all opposition, GSCASH was replaced by a puppet panel called the Internal Complaint Committee.

The question is, how far will this protest help in reversing these decisions? Also, the public inquiry lacks the wider participation of common students, who are rather seen enjoying tea at the Sabarmati dhabha. There is no doubt that the protest has high symbolic value and the idea is innovative but can it really help the larger cause of the JNU community?

Also, wrapping up the daily inquiry with a cultural performance has helped in attracting considerable students and gathered a good amount of attention in the media. But everybody is waiting for the final judgment and the punishment that the accused might receive – even if it remains symbolic in nature.