& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Revisiting the Dhaka University Order, 1973

Education has been plunged into deep crisis, at a time when there is need for fundamental educational reform, including introduction of curriculum changes to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century. The degeneration of the University of Dhaka through political patronisation in appointment and promotion, admissions and even granting of classes, and the patronisation of arms and party politics which reached deadly proportions in recent years, must be seriously addressed.

Kamal Hossain
THE University of Dhaka has had a central role in our history. Upon its establishment in 1921 it was viewed as an institution which would nurture the best and the brightest among those seeking university education. It became the envy of many in the University of Calcutta for its beautiful residential campus, for its high academic standards and for a faculty which earned for it recognition as a centre of excellence of an international standard.
Its reputation continued to grow as it produced graduates who proved themselves in the professions. in the civil service and in academia. Those who were to be in the forefront of the emerging middle classes were the proud products of this institution. Following 1947 it became the principal centre of higher learning in East Bengal. It was propelled into an historic role during the language movement in 1952 when some of its students suffered martyrdom, while many students and teachers played a proactiverole.
The Shaheed Min ar emerged as a universal symbol of commitment to a just cause -- the vindication of the right of the people to recognition of their mother tongue as the state language - having a pride of place in the University campus. The growth of nationalism, through which we attained independence, can also trace its creative roots to the University, both among teachers and students. Then dynamic role in the sixties forged national unity and gave strength to the people's liberation movement in 1971. The brutal assault on the campus on the night of March 25/26 resulted in martyrdom of teachers and students and demolition of the Shaheed Minar, thereby acknowledging the inspirational role of the University.
Distinguished teachers and spirited students were actively involved in the liberation struggle, and shared the prize of victory. It was, therefore, understandable that the University was to be a pivotal institution in the building of the new nation, and many of the teachers played a key role. The deputy chairman and members of the Planning Commission, vice-chancellors, heads of ministries, chairmen and members of important commissions, including Public Service Commission, Education Commission, were drawn from among its teachers, and many of them were consulted for their wise counsel on important issues.
It was in this setting that the senior teachers who had been actively involved in the liberation struggle deliberated together to produce the draft of the 1973 Dhaka University Order. A constitution has been described as the autobiography of a nation, since it aims to build safeguards in the light of the negative experiences of the past. The Dhaka University Order was a clear response to negative experiences of
the sixties, when the government had damaged the institution by extending patronage to those seen as "loyalists" and harassing those who did not succumb to its pressure. The scandalous assault on Professor A N.M. Mahmood can be recalled as one of those black episodes, a symptom of that period, as was the show cause notice issued to some of the most respected teachers, including Professors Abdur Razzaque and Muzaffar Ahmed Chowdhury.
The exhilaration of independence brought with it high hopes and expectations of complete academic freedom and protection from external interference by bureaucrats and wielders of state power. Thus, it was thought that academic freedom would be secured by providing for elections to most key offices in the University. The vice-chancellor was to be appointed from a panel of three candidates elected by the Senate. Members of the Syndicate and the deans were also to be elected. These elections would, it was believed, effectively protect the University from external intervention and, thus, would ensure academic autonomy and freedom, and standards of excellence in the pursuit of truth and knowledge. A more idealistic aspiration could not be imagined.
It was my privilege as a young teacher, appointed as Minister of Law in 1972, to receive the draft law from our most respected senior teachers, Professor Habibullah, Professor Qazi Motahar Hossain. Professor Muzaffar Ahmed Chowdhury and others, I think it provides a revealing footnote to history to record Bangabandhu's reaction after he went through the draft that I handed to him, saying that this was the work of all our "respected Sirs." and, therefore, we could accept and pass it. He smiled, and said that he also respected those who had prepared it as his "Sirs.” He then paused, and with a remarkable degree of prescience said: "Do you think it would be possible to digest so many elections, so many elected offices in the University?"
What even he might not have foreseen was how elections not only became a magnificent, but a terrible and destructive, obsession pursued within the University, exorcising the pursuit of excellence and upholding of academic values and standards, and afflicting an increasing number of teachers with a kind of appetite for power politics, and pursuit of narrow self-interest, with no holds barred and no values respected, and working only along the narrowest of party lines. This unhealthy development in national politics and in our universities, which became infected with the virus of doliokoron, was responsible for the occupation by armed cadres of every residential hall under the patronisation of whichever party was in power. The ordinary students were reduced to hostages, and they lived in fear.
A power structure emerged which, on party lines, asserted control over appointments and promotions, and on the award of lucrative contracts in different sectors ranging from building contracts to provision of supplies and services. The confrontational and unprincipled politics that began to develop during the late seventies saw institutionalisation of armed cadres and doliokoron in the uni-
versities. Academic corruption through patronisation by the ruling party as well as by those who were to be the guardians of the University, the Vice-Chancellors and others in powerful positions, served in these positions as instruments of those in power. They could pride themselves in claiming they had established peace and harmony by dividing patronage on the basis of awarding 60 percent of the prize to the students supporting the ruling party and 40 percent to the students supporting the opposition party.
One of the lowest points was hit in 2002. A promising woman student of Buet, Sony, was gunned down in broad daylight in the campus during a shoot-out between the rival groups of "students" competing to extort money from university building projects. In the same year, citizens throughout the country had expressed their shock at the brutal assault on women students of Shamsunnahar Hall in the University of Dhaka, when they were protesting the activities of armed cadres. The resignation of the vice-chancellor over this episode acknowledged the failure of the authorities to fulfill their responsibilities.
The sanctity of educational institutions calls for effective action to protect residential halls from occupation by armed cadres who enjoy impunity through those in power. The criminal armed elements on campus and their patrons within the University and outside should not remain above the law. A legal framework, which has enabled tins to happen, must be critically revisited as students continue to be victims of violence, a symptom of sick politics.
It is a testimony to the courage of the students, conscientious teachers and conscious citizens throughout the country that they raised their voices and launched a movement to demand justice and effec-
tive action against those responsible for the brutal police action in 2002 on the female students of Shamsunnahar Hall, and on those who were protesting against such action. The inquiry into the incident of violence in Shamshunahar Hall, which was conducted by a judge of the High Court Division of the Supreme Court, pointed out some of the real roots of violence on the campus as did the more recent judicial enquiry into violent occurrences.
If corrective measures are to be seriously considered, would not the 1973 Charter have to be critically reviewed and amendments carried out? Education has been plunged into deep crisis, at a time when there is need for fundamental educational reform, including introduction of curriculum changes to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century. The degeneration of the University of Dhaka through politi- cal patronisation in appointment and promotion, admissions and even granting of classes, and the patronisation of arms and party politics which reached deadly proportions in recent years, must be seriously addressed.
In recent weeks, the university has in certain cases become an arena for different types of unprincipled acts of violence clearly being manipulated from sources outside the campus. The recent eruption of violence among different student groups around factional political disputes bears no relation to the pursuit of knowledge and truth. This should arouse the conscience of all as we seek to retrieve our heritage and revive democratic institutions through national unity and national consensus. Should not all of us who venerate Dhaka University join hands to re-generate that institution by agreeing to amendments to the 1973 Order?
In the light of experience and the negative consequences of elections and party or regime selection, should not academically credible processes for appointment to key posts, including those of deans and vice-chancellors, be introduced, such as national and international search committees? This challenge can be met through meaningful dialogue, and seeking consensus transcending partisan and personal interests.
Bangabandhu was right. Too many elections resulted not only in indigestion but also in food poisoning, through intense self-serving power politics. The time has come to attend to these ailments and to restore the University to the status which it deserves as a recognised centre of excellence with a respected past and the promise of similar standingin the future.
Dr Kamal Hossam is President Gone Forum.