Has DU admin turned into a PR agency for the ruling party?
With Dhaka University cancelling a discussion meeting on the new curriculum, a question mark has arisen in regards to freedom of expression on public university campuses. The way the whole episode unfolded exemplified how a public university's authority becomes subservient to mysterious quarters attempting to strangle a leading academic institution in the country. Our experience on the day is worth sharing as it highlights the need to recognise the dangers looming large on campuses.
As soon as the new curriculum became public, it drew the attention of critics and invited numerous debates on social media. Several discussion events have been organised on this issue. As many as four teachers and concerned guardians of students were arrested during those events. As members of the University Teachers' Network, we felt it was urgent to discuss the controversial issue and decided to arrange a meeting on the new curriculum to identify its potentially problematic areas.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. The open discussion was supposed to be held at the university, where relevant experts would brief on separate assessments of science and literature subjects under the new curriculum. We chose a physics professor for science subjects and an English professor for literature, and also invited a curriculum expert and educational activist to the programme. We duly completed all the official formalities to get permission from the university authorities to hold the programme on December 13, 2023 at RC Majumdar Auditorium under the Faculty of Arts. We also submitted the required fee, along with the security deposit, at the bank.
On the day, I arrived early to start the preparations alongside several students. While hanging up the banner, I received a call from the dean of the arts faculty, who informed me that he had received instructions from "certain quarters" to not allow us to use the auditorium for the programme. I expressed my surprise as we had already outlined our plans and adhered to the university rules. The dean reiterated that if the programme went on, he would intervene. Immediately, the staff responsible for the venue locked it down, and we did not have anything left to do but turn it into a protest that eventually took place in front of the Aparajeyo Bangla.
This experience was shocking and unfortunate. The space and scope for discussing even new curricula have significantly diminished at Dhaka University. The more partisan and governmentalised the authority of a public university becomes, the more restrictions on the freedoms of expression and speech become visible. As a result, the university ceases to represent the image of a higher education institution that upholds and safeguards the free speech and knowledge essential for academic research.
In many ways, the university authority resembles a political party office at the local level, where conversations revolve solely around party posts, winning elections by any means, and the overall political hustle for personal interests and advancement. This unfortunate trend is most apparent when the teachers-cum-ruling party activists engage in demeaning each other to receive nominations from their political group for competing in the Dhaka University Teachers Association (DUTA), dean, syndicate, or senate elections.
In many cases, the university administration deems anyone critical of any government policy or its activities an "enemy of the government" or "enemy of the state." This stance, adopted by pro-government teachers, often drives their decision-making and even personal relationships with colleagues. Those not affiliated with pro-government circles have to confront numerous administrative and professional obstacles.
While university syndicate, senate, and dean positions are electorally determined, the freedom to choose the candidates is at risk. During the last VC's tenure, the university authority temporarily suspended many selection/promotion boards just before the dean election. There were allegations of junior teachers receiving calls from the higher authority, stating that if certain candidates failed to win, the selection boards would not reopen.
The university has a deans' committee composed of all elected deans. This committee, not incorporated in the 1973 president's order, decides our fate and (in most cases) determines who will get what. This deans' committee was the prime mover in disallowing a candidate to sit for the admission test for the second time and in stripping the social sciences faculty of its responsibility to conduct admission tests. This committee arguably acted only to fulfil the personal wishes of the then VCs.
The Academic Council, the statutory body for such institutional decisions, appeared to be no more than a rubber-stamp parliament during all these events. As far as I recall, the last VC in the Academic Council was partisan and partial in most cases and had the habit of selectively giving the floor to those loyal to him. When the VC wanted an issue to pass, those opposing it had their mics occasionally turned off.
Meanwhile, our senate members and provosts deny the day-to-day sufferings of the students living in highly congested residential halls. There is ample evidence that we care little for the welfare of general students. All these issues further taint our image as university teachers. Our actions do not reflect what we teach in our classrooms, thus creating an environment of hypocrisy and diminishing students' respect for us. The administrators have assumed a more political means of control. The fact that DUTA candidates were elected in the last election without mandates, in the absence of opposition, signals that the situation is unlikely to get better.
Overall, one can argue that DU has lost its inherent structural identity and characteristics as a democratic and free institution for learning and research. A patron-client relationship has become the order of the day in the university's administrative and professional ambiance.
Still, whatever the current academic environment is at Dhaka University, all students and teachers aspire to see it climb up the global university rankings. But the political determination of the university administration to protect establishment- or government-centric opinions will not lead the university academically anywhere in the world. The university administration appears to have turned into a public relations office tasked with campaigning for the party in power, thus contradicting the role a university teacher needs to play in identifying alternative or better paths for the state and people. A political party's identity with a university's identity is never good news.
The recent suppression of our open discussion on the new curriculum exposes a broader decline in the university's commitment to academic freedom and critical discourse. In the past, inclusivity and tolerance used to prevail among teachers, who considered each other colleagues from the same institution and showed mutual respect despite differences in opinions. This practice needs to be in operation in order for Dhaka University, or any university for that matter, to be a critical tertiary centre for learning and knowledge production.
As told to Monorom Polok of The Daily Star.
Dr Mohammad Tanzimuddin Khan is professor at the Department of International Relations in Dhaka University.
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
Comments