Breaking Locks: A New Game Played By JNU Administration

Misreading a Supreme Court judgment, JNU administration and the ICC, on the eve of April 24, 2018, broke the locks of the sealed office of the Gender Sensitisation Committee against Sexual Harassment (GSCASH) to accumulate the files related to the cases of sexual harassment without the consent of either the complainants or the teachers and student representatives of the committee.

The JNU harassment watchdog tussle dates back to last year's September, when the JNU administration, in a summary manner, replaced the GSCASH with Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) in its 269th executive council meeting. This move invited extensive reprimands from student and teacher bodies, as well as women’s rights organization.

Disparities in the way both the committees plans to function created a sense of anguish, disappointment and ire in the JNU community.

GSCASH consisted of four elected faculty members (at least two women), four elected student representative (at least two women), an elected woman official as well as an elected woman staff member, among others. The ICC, however, includes only three student representatives, three faculty members and two non-teaching staff members. Except for the students, all members will be nominated.

In addition to the possibility of the biased working of the body due to the creation of power hierarchies within the committee, the move also poses questions about the degree of autonomy the watchdog committee would enjoy.

“The Supreme Court order dated 23rd April 2018 had put a stay on the previous High Court order - dated on April 10, 2018, asking JNU to form temporary ICC comprising of GSCASH and ICC members to deal with the pending thirty-one cases with GSCASH - and mandated ICC to proceed with the complaints meanwhile,” said Geeta Kumari, president of JNUSU while speaking to media.

Considering the hearing date of May 1, 2018, already given by High Court over a writ petition asking for quashing of orders superseding GSCASH, the question arises on the haste shown by the administration in accessing the files without seeking the consent of the complainants and representatives of GSCASH.

In times when a university professor who is accused of sexual harassment by eight women faces no suspension and also manages to get bail within 80 minutes, demands to reinstate the GSCASH shouldn’t surprise anyone. Students and teachers are aghast by the recent breaking down of locks and blame the administration for creating a vulnerable environment for women students within the campus.