The recent past has seen many student-led protests against harassment in the academic sphere. The cases of harassment are mostly against professors who seek comfort in the knowledge that their power and influence over the students’ lives will ensure silence and continued tolerance from the other end.
But, as has been witnessed lately, many women students have taken to social media platforms to, if nothing else, at least generate awareness about those individuals one must be wary. Raya Sarkar’s initiative was one such instance – to speak out thus, and in such large numbers, is extremely courageous, and deserves all the support and recognition.
More so because, as recent news claims, legal action has been taken against a prime accused in Sarkar’s list – Lawrence Liang, former Dean of Law, Governance, and Citizenship at Ambedkar University. This comes after nearly four months of investigation – and is quite opposite to the discomfort many previously voiced, of there being no formal system of “checks and balances” to ascertain the veracity of the complaints put forth by the list. And although Liang has only been suspended from his administrative position for two years, it does appear to be a big win for those who decided that silence was not the way forward.
To reduce this event to an inconsequential, attention-seeking and baseless one-time incident is to support the wrong-doers. Moreover, to shatter the glass protecting such individuals, taking a radical step such as the release of the list was extremely crucial. The academia is riddled with hierarchical structures and the power struggle that it brings along – and therefore, a strong force is required to have voices get heard. What is yet to be seen, however, is whether similar steps will be taken against Atul Kumar Johri, a professor in Jawaharlal Nehru University, against whom several women have spoken out, in the past few days.
While Ambedkar University took measures to probe into the complaints, other universities have fallen short of reassuring students in a similar manner – let alone setting up an internal committee to address the issue, The Jawaharlal Nehru University, in Johri’s case, have blatantly refused to comply with the students’ demands.
In a press release issued by the Jawaharlal Nehru University Student’s Union (JNUSU), it is mentioned how “[…] this delay in recording statements is a clear sign of the lackadaisical attitude of the Delhi Police towards the case and shows the nexus of the police and administration. In the case of Kanhaiya Kumar, he was arrested within 24 hours of an FIR being filed ,then why wait to arrest Johri? It also shows that the Delhi Police is completely insensitive towards the plight of the complainants. Since Johri has neither been suspended by the JNU admin nor arrested, he is at complete liberty to influence the process of investigation.”
While the authorities are trying to evade the situation, it seems highly unlikely that the students will allow it to be sidelined entirely, with several ex-students having (reportedly) informally approached the university’s student’s union with their own stories against the professor.
In times of such urgency, it is extremely crucial for universities to ensure a speedy and suitable conclusion to prevent further harassment of students within academic spaces, and outside. Infantilising them to silence them will only add fuel to fire.
Constructing academic spaces as a haven for individual growth and creative evolution is an image that students automatically create when they place themselves inside classrooms. But they run the risk of being blinded by the awe they inspire, making them incapable of immediately reacting to any form of harassment that such individuals might be engaging in.
What is most unsettling in all these cases, though, is the ease with which such academicians pin the blame on students. They keep insisting on “them (the complainants) being low on attendance, hence falsifying information to spite them (the professors)”, “her/them being ‘forward’ and ‘provocative’ ” – or even, very conveniently, “being unaware of so-and-so action being suggestive of sexual advancement.”
With no system to fall back on, students are left with very limited choices for redressal. In fact, they often run the risk of being in dicier situations as the accused becomes aware, in several cases, of the complainant’s decision to approach higher authorities in the hope of finding justice. They are then in a position to use more force and intimidation as a means of ensuring continued compliance from the student(s). It is only because of institutional harassment; therefore, those individual cases continue to grow in number.
–