June 11, 2006

SIX decades ago, students emerged as a unified force to fight colonisation. A little later, they again stood up to resist dictatorship; today, however, whenever students leave their primary vocation and indulge in activism, it is grossly maneuvered by petty political issues. Thus, one can’t help but ask the obvious: what has become of student politics in Pakistan?

With vigour and a “pure” idealism of sorts, students are the most impressionable and passionate lot in society. Their activism is understandable as their minds are more receptive to ideas. Throughout history, student bodies have been the most enthusiastic participants in political movements. The subcontinent, too, is witness to many instances where would-be-literati have displayed an inclination towards politics.

Of course, in such cases it is up to the system to not only hone this activism but also channelise it in a positive manner, that is, by institutionalising political activity on campus. Since the maintenance of a certain code of conduct is as important as allowing students to express themselves, an established system allows freedom to students while leaving the regulatory powers with the administration.

Unfortunately, these two features that complement the working of a sound educational system are missing in some of the major institutions of Pakistan. Not only are student unions banned but the practices of existing student bodies that operate under the patronage of mainstream political parties do not even come close to the code of conduct fit for an educational establishment. It is indeed ironic that a country whose independence movement was shouldered by students to a great extent and whose political history boasts of active student participation has stifled the development of healthy political culture among its youth.

The ban on students unions is among the many legacies of the Zia era. Whatever the motives by those who have enforced this ban, one thing is certain: the expected results were grossly miscalculated and, thus, the move has backfired. The suppression of this positive channeling made it easier for the mainstream political parties to manipulate the dynamism of students for their own designs. As a result, a healthy political culture was replaced by the miltarisation of students. Guns and bamboo sticks replaced the culture of debate and fear and oppression substituted the campaigning one saw just before the elections.

The past 22 years since the ban have seen the development of campuses as battlegrounds to settle petty political scores, and violence as a tool to enforce one’s will. Due to the presence of a network of these parties in different educational institutes in Karachi and indeed all over the country, even a minor skirmish on campus has a domino effect. In no time the representatives of these political parties in different colleges are up in arms against each other.

A fight automatically suspends all academic activities on campus. Tests, assignments, presentations and lectures all come to a grinding halt when students pull out bamboo sticks from the manholes and bricks fly in the air. Students present on campus run the risk of being caught in the cross-fire. “Chaos ensues as some teachers suspend classes while others don’t. Some prefer to keep students within the classroom while others advise them to leave the campus,” says Haris, a final-year student at the University of Karachi in the Faculty of Arts.

The days following the clash present a plethora of problems for students. It would not be incorrect to say that the aftermath of a fight has a much more adverse effect on academic activities than the clash itself. For a day or two, students are left in a state of uncertainty regarding the resumption of the classes. Once the campus reopens, students have to put up with the post-clash drill.

Ironically, the ones to suffer the most from this are students who are not even remotely associated with the fight or the political parties for that matter. In the University of Karachi, students have no choice but to walk to their departments every day as the shuttle services are suspended. Those who reach the university at 8:25am for their 8:30 class have to miss attendance as they are required to spend 10-20 minutes at the flimsy security checkpoint that follows a clash. Students are cornered for carrying “mysterious items” in their bags. In fact, as a student this scribe came under fire for carrying a a personal CD player, which the security personnel deemed “dangerous”.

These problems surface every time the student representatives of various political parties clash with one another. The questions one is compelled to ask are: how do 90 per cent of students let this minority play havoc with their academic calendar? Why are teachers pushed into suspending classes by such students? And why does the administration allow such hooliganism to prevail on campus?

As far as the first question goes, there is a general consensus among students that it is better to steer clear of the parties in conflict. Gibran, a final-year student at Sir Syed University for Engineering and Technology, says: “A hero saving the day is the stuff that movies are made of. In reality, if you interfere with the workings of these parties, you only end up getting thrashed by them.” Considering the fact that the “neutral” students do not have any support from both the teachers and administration, it is only fair that they decide to keep their mouths shut in the wake of violence on campus. Unfortunately, teachers also comprise the helpless lot that is pushed around. With students enjoying more clout than the teachers or administration, an ugly shift of power has taken place. The influence that the political parties wield in the city is also found in their student wings’ on campuses. Since students know they are answerable to their unit heads rather than teachers, they do not indulge in the nuances that a normal student-teacher relationship demands. Therefore, teachers too are dealt with the same methods employed to take on opposition: coercion and violence. In such a scenario, the best teachers can do is peacefully mediate without overstepping their territory.

With little or no scope for a mediatory role which can be played by both teachers and students, a passive acceptance of violence on campuses has come about. Not only do students grow immune to violence, they begin to see it as a part and parcel of the entire higher education experience. For Fatima, a third-year humanities student at the University of Karachi, the first fight was a bit surprising but, as she puts it, “you get used to it. In the last three years that I have spent in the university, I have only seen two major fights.”

This is an alarming development for if there is submission to violence, then no one will bother doing anything about it. Since teachers and students feel helpless in the face of the will of political parties, therefore, a mechanism should be in place where students and teachers can work in collaboration with the administration to keep a check on things.

This is what an official of the security personnel deployed at Karachi University also recommends. For Rangers, an alliance of students, teachers and administration is very important. “There are 58 departments in the University. We cannot be positioned in all of them. If a clash occurs in a remote corner of the university, it takes time for the security staff to spring into action. Since students and teachers sense tension before the clash starts, it would help if they alerted us too,” says a Rangers’ personnel who chose to remain anonymous.

While the security staff counts on student-teacher cooperation, students insist on having a framework whereby the administration chalks out a drill to be performed during and after the clash. Since the biggest confusion arising out of a fight pertains to the suspension of classes, a routine which can be followed would save a lot of students from getting caught in the cross-fire.

Sarwar Nasim, President of Karachi University Teachers Society (KUTS), not only seconds the proposal of a three-tier framework for dealing with violence but adds a fourth mediatory to the equation too: “The city government should play a role in ensuring that the campuses are arms-free and that no clashes take place there.”

Although the need for an institutionalised mechanism to deal with violence is strongly felt by the stakeholders, the administration does not have any such mechanism on the cards. Dr Pirzada Qasim Raza Siddiqui, the vice-chancellor of Karachi University, does acknowledge the importance of collaborative efforts of students and teachers but stops short of commenting on a framework.

The law and order situation on campuses today leaves little room for analysing whether politics in educational institutions is good or bad. The need of the hour is to ensure that those students who invest their time and energy in the four most important years of their lives do not miss an opportunity or lose focus just because a few political parties with vested interests are unable to settle their scores peacefully.

The writer is a sub-editor in Dawn

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)