top of page

“I’m not playing games anymore” VC tells AUSG, Open Townhall Ends in 24-hour Ultimatum to Repeal New Security Measures


Photo from the townhall on 27th January | Photo courtesy: Aditya Padinjat/The Edict
Photo from the townhall on 27th January | Photo courtesy: Aditya Padinjat/The Edict

In the first instance of Ashoka University’s administration engaging publicly with the student body about the anti-surveillance protests, members of the Ashoka University Student Government (AUSG) presented a memorandum outlining their demands to Vice-Chancellor Somak Raychaudhury and Dean of Academic Affairs Bikram Phookun at the open amphitheatre on Monday.


The memorandum outlines three demands: immediate suspension of the baggage scanners and metal detectors, student consultation on future campus issues, and assurance of no disciplinary action for student protestors. At the end of the two-hour long discussion, Raychaudhury agreed to the second and third demands but he refused to accept the first.


AUSG President Aditi Warrier (ASP’25) issued an ultimatum to Raychaudhury to sign the memorandum within 24 hours. “Memorandums happen as a package, not as individual [demands],” she emphasised.


The new security measures were implemented to address the “exponential increase of influx of alcohol bottles and drugs” into campus, said Raychaudhury. He mentioned that the previous semester saw a “sharp increase” in substance-related cases dealt with by the administration, infirmary, and disciplinary committees such as the Committee Against Disciplinary Infractions (CADI) and the Committee Against Sexual Harassment (CASH). This was the first time substance abuse has officially been cited to the student body as a reason for implementing the baggage scanners.


Various students and faculty members pointed to the privacy implications and undemocratic implementation of the scanners, which were put in place without consulting elected representatives of the AUSG or members of faculty. Concerns were routinely raised about how heightened surveillance is unlikely to succeed in tackling substance abuse and ‘mental health issues’ on campus. 


Warrier, accompanied by AUSG Vice President Samarth Jain (ASP’25) and Undergraduate  Councillor Insha Husain (UG’26) started the meeting with three questions that summarised the student body’s discussions over the last week. 


Warrier, going first, asked why increased surveillance was the first step in the administration’s strive to tackle substance abuse, especially when research proves it is not only ineffective but sometimes “counterproductive.” She continued, “we have been asking for an increase in mental health resources and community programmes for one and a half years now.” 


Reports from “Operations [E/N: here, Blue Circle Medi Services], which runs the medical facilities” on alcohol abuse from bottles entering campus, from the Student Life Office on substance abuse within the residence halls, and “systematic trafficking of prohibited substances” uncovered last semester factored into the decision to install baggage scanners, Raychaudhury explained.


Jain, going second, questioned the lack of student involvement in the decision-making process, particularly in the committee reportedly deliberating student concerns regarding the new protocol. “Why does a committee need to be augmented to include student voices?” Jain asked, “It should have been formed with student participation from the beginning.”


Raychadhury, in response, said that the committee was initially set up to “deal with problems that occurred between staff, faculty and founders.” A new standing committee including “student representation” would be formed to reexamine the screening measures. The administration has always been in conversation with the AUSG regarding student-facing matters, Raychaudhury claims, and this would be the first time the new committee would be in action.


Lastly, Husain, referencing the night-long sit-in protest outside Gate 2 on Thursday, 23rd January, 2025, questioned why no one from the administration engaged with protesting students even when they repeatedly tried to contact senior members of the administration. The protest ended with students walking into campus without being scanned or having their bags screened.


Highlighting Raychaudhury’s earlier commitment to handling substance-induced sexual abuse on campus, AUSG members asked why protesting students, many of whom were female and gender minorities, were barred from using washrooms inside the campus, effectively compelling them to use open facilities out in the night where their safety was put at risk.


Raychaudhury said that he was pained about what happened on Thursday night, calling the circumstances “deeply regrettable.” He apologised for the events of the demonstration in response to a student asking if the administration would take responsibility, “I did say that I am sorry. I am sorry for what happened that night. It should not happen again.”


Regarding the accusation of curbing washroom access to protesting students, the VC said he had “conflicting evidence” on the incident. His colleagues from the administration claimed there was washroom access at 1:00 a.m. Several students came forth with testimonies to dispute this fact. The Edict, reporting on the protests outside Gate 2 throughout the night, had earlier fact-checked that access to the staff washrooms at Gate 1 was finally granted around 4 a.m. Raychaudhury said that he could not resolve the issues but asked students to move on. “This cannot happen again,” he emphasised. 


Bittu, Associate Professor of Biology and Psychology, addressed the issue of student representation on campus, advocating for more regular town halls before the implementation of such measures rather than after, and the need to consult with a committee with student representation. “Staff. . . especially contractual staff, have been facing scrutiny and scanners on their way in and out [of campus] for years without any protest on [this] liberal campus,” he highlighted. “We vote when consensus breaks, especially in small groups. So my first proposal is, can we institute [open townhalls] as a general system going forward, rather than something reactive?” he concluded. 


Bittu also spoke about the limited ability of faculty and students to communicate and discuss such issues: “I would really urge the reinstatement of our ability as faculty to email students, that can [help] preemptively deal with this sort of thing.”


Husain and Warrier brought up the bureaucratic processes historically slowing down communication between administration and students. Warrier asked Raychaudhury about deadlines and timelines of committees in charge of decision-making being delayed. Raychaudhury assured there would be no delays in the committee’s constitution, telling members of the AUSG, “I am not playing games anymore.”


Answering a question about the sudden deactivation of the AUSG’s institutional email account during Thursday’s protest, Raychaudhury reinforced that the administration had no part in disabling the account. Citing correspondences with the IT department, he said Google had flagged the ID and blocked it for “sending out emails to multiple people together.” 


Contrasting his claim of having proof for the same, an AUSG member pointed out that they have previously “done the same kind of mass emailing” always and that “everybody’s inbox knows it.”


One student raised the issue of the administration “stifling student opinion,” pointing out the wetting of the atrium to prevent students from assembling. Raychaudhury responded to this citing that there was discussion of installing new tiles at the atrium. He said that he asked for this to be stopped, referring to the incident as a “minor issue.” Warrier refuted this, saying Raychaudhury had earlier admitted to her that the atrium is “supposed to be a pretty place for us to welcome outsiders” and students should not gather there. 


As the townhall came to an end, a student took the mic to ask whether the administration is prioritising the wellbeing of students in general. “If well-being is the question,” they said, then safety issues can arise without alcohol bottles or drugs even entering campus; these will remain even with people “drinking five minutes away from the campus and [then] entering.”


Warrier closed the hectic, two-hour long townhall by addressing the Vice-Chancellor one last time: “Professor, we understand that you have to consider a lot of other stakeholders and . . .  that you can't make a decision on this [issue]. You're always giving us timelines with everything in the past and so we as a student body . . . give you 24 hours to sign a memorandum, [the first point on which is] that you will suspend the scanners until [a committee involving students] arrives at a consensus.”


With inputs from Sahana Radhakrishnan.

The writers are Staff Writer and Editor, Politics Newsdesk


[Fact checked by Aditya Roy]

[Edited by Keerthana Panchanathan and Srijana Siri]

Comments


bottom of page