People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol. XXXV
No.
36 September 04, 2011 |
DTF Victory: A Rebuff to
Neo-Liberal Policies in
Education
Vijender Sharma
THE
elections to the post of president and 15-member executive committee of
the
Delhi University Teachers’ Association (DUTA) were held on August 25,
2011 with
68 per cent polling. Amar Deo Sharma of Democratic Teachers’ Front
(DTF) won as
its president securing 2,415 votes with a record of 45.8 per cent votes
which
no one in the past ever got.
Amar
Deo Sharma defeated by a margin of 524 votes his nearest rival
belonging to
Academics for Action and Development (AAD) – an organisation
representing a
section of the Congress. The AAD candidate got 1,891 or 35.8 per cent
votes.
The DTF secured 10 per cent more votes than the AAD. The BJP backed
National
Democratic Teachers’ Front (NDTF) candidate came third with just 872
votes or
16.5 per cent votes.
Three
of the four candidates the DTF contested for the executive committee
won with
the fourth losing very narrowly. DTF’s Abha Dev Habib came first with
highest
number of votes followed by Saikat Ghosh and Giriraj Bairwa. One of the
three
candidates of NDTF for executive committee lost.
A
day earlier, on August 24 there was an election to the membership of
the
executive council (EC),
the highest decision making body of the University, from the University
Court
which is constituted by all principals of the colleges and all
professors of
the University, and some representatives of the alumni, legislatures,
professions and commerce and business, etc. Ajay Kumar, general
manager,
Progressive Printers, got elected to the EC.
The
DUTA election was contested in the backdrop of the sixth pay revision
with a
lot of negative service conditions for teachers, two terms of DUTA
leadership
led by AAD (2007-11) during which it did not fight against negative
changes in
service conditions, butchering of all democratic norms and institutions
by the
previous and current vice-chancellors to force the implementation of
semester
system as part of the 100-day agenda of the MHRD led by Kapil Sibal and
several
bills introduced in parliament after the UPA-2 government came to power
in
2009.
The
DUTA in its history of more than four decades fought and won big
battles to
improve service conditions of teachers and to
democratise the functioning of the University and colleges. It won the
right to
promotion, staff councils, rotation of headship of the departments,
elected
representation in the academic council (AC) and executive council of
the
University and governing bodies of colleges. It fought against
harassment of
temporary/ ad hoc teachers and for the dignity of all teachers. And it firmly resisted many policy assaults by
successive governments that threatened to erode our hard won
rights and
democratic academic environment.
The
DTF during the election campaign approached the teachers saying,
“Today such assaults are being intensified many times over. Several
bills await approval of parliament that aim at
drastic changes in the landscape of universities and colleges through
aggressive marketisation of higher education and authoritarian measures
to
overcome resistance Semesterisation and the points based system of
denying
promotion are part and parcel of this policy assault. Shall we be cowed
down or
shall we fight back? And with what kind
of DUTA leadership can we fight back?”
The
teachers responded to the DTF positively. They overwhelmingly voted
for the DTF. They voted for the DTF because they saw over the past two
years an
unprecedented united struggle by teachers on the issue of semester
system, but
under an unwilling DUTA leadership.
This
leadership was forced by the DTF and the collective will of the
teachers to
fight the semester system as part of the neo-liberal agenda of the UPA
government in higher education. The teachers noted that the DTF was
always at the
forefront.
The
teachers at large
whose opinion was bulldozed, who were humiliated and threatened by the
previous
and present administrations realised that the struggle against semester
system,
commercialisation of education through several bills pending before
parliament
was the struggle forced by the DTF on an unwilling leadership of the
DUTA. They
also noted that the AAD leadership of the DUTA withdrew into a shell
using the
Court order of November 2010 regarding semester system as a pretext. Its withdrawal was so complete that it
watched in silence as the new University administration outdid
even its
predecessor in disregarding statutory provisions, throwing all norms
and
propriety to the winds, and vindictively targeting teachers who were
seen as part
of the movement of resistance. The AAD leadership of DUTA did not
protest
against it at all. The administration's arrogance has been doubly
fortified by
the concurrent silence of the AAD and NDTF and their unwillingness to
even
express dissent in the AC/EC. The DUTA
leadership had been similarly unwilling to confront the government on
adverse
changes in service conditions.
The
campaign launched by the
DTF against neo-liberal reforms in higher education through several
policy
changes by the UPA government, several bills introduced in parliament
and
others in the offing, was so effective that the teachers at large
started
raising slogans against FEI and commercialisation and privatisation of
higher
education. During the struggle against forcible imposition of semester
system,
the DTF had through Sitaram Yechury, Polit Bureau member of the CPI(M)
and
member of parliament, organised a DUTA delegation to the president in
her
capacity as the Visitor of the