The AUSG Candidates Debate September 2026

Earlier this week, The Edict, in collaboration with the AUEC (Ashoka University Election Commission), hosted the annual AUSG (Ashoka University Student Government) candidates' debates. The debates ran across two days: Candidates for late graduates, third- and fourth-year councils spoke on Tuesday, 15th September 2026; candidates for the First Year Council (FYC) and the Young India Fellowship (YIF) spoke on Wednesday, 16th September. The decision to conduct the debates over a span of two days was taken in response to the large number of candidates contesting this electoral cycle. All three debates were moderated by Gauri Deshpande (UG’27) and Nethra Ramakrishnan (UG’29), editors of the Politics Newsdesk at The Edict. 

Third, Fourth, and Late Graduate Council

Many candidates spoke about the need for greater transparency and accountability within the AUSG. Kriti Chhibber (UG’28), third-year council candidate, from the Horizon collective, noted that the student government has become a closed-off and opaque body. She emphasised making it accountable and effective in solving the day-to-day problems faced by the student body. Trisha Iyer (UG’28), third-year council candidate, highlighted the need for more transparency concerning the process for learning needs and urged voters to vote for her to continue the efforts carried out by her collective, the United Students’ Front (USF). 

The policies regarding Gender Affirmative Housing (GAH) were also a frequently discussed subject among the candidates. Sneha Lohia (UG’27) from the USF noted that gender affirmative housing has been sex segregated on campus and non-sex-segregated in off-campus housing in TDI, which leads to the students having to choose between a safe space and residence on campus. When asked by the audience how to convince the administration regarding the same, they said that the precedent of non-sex-segregated GAH on campus already existed and that talking to the administration would be complicated and would require large student support. 

The late graduate council candidate Aan Rakshit from Horizon also noted issues concerning housing and infrastructure, talking about the lack of basic facilities such as medicines and libraries at TDI and late graduates’ inability to access the late grad lounge and cross-access. 

Student worker unity was also widely discussed. Chhibber, in her opening remarks, compared the mass mobilisation during the surveillance protests to the scarce student participation in the workers’ protest, noting the dissolution of the culture of campus politics. Iyer called for an equal campus for students and workers and, having worked with the workers, talked about their working conditions and the need for basic facilities such as pads and proper dining services. Sulagna Moitra, a fourth-year candidate from the USF, noted the increase in the Haryana minimum wage policy and the contract on the new campus being given to a different employer. 

When asked by the moderators about one actionable policy that candidates wished to implement, Moitra suggested that the caste survey be carried out given that everything has been prepared. She was questioned regarding the Equal Opportunity Cell (EOC), and its issues around enumeration and anonymity and how she plans to resolve this. She responded that, unlike Orientation Week sessions, the survey cannot be made compulsory despite the protests. She acknowledged the opaqueness around the survey but assured that the AUSG can work with the EOC to carry out the same. Iyer added that the main issue was lack of volunteers and manpower to conduct the survey, but suggested that with a fully functioning student government and collaboration with the EOC, carrying the survey out would not be an issue. 

First Year Council

This election cycle, there is a huge number standing for the first-year council, spanning fifteen candidates. Of them, fourteen were present at the candidates' debate. The issues raised by them focused on the transition to university and infrastructural issues arising due to the large cohort size, as well as logistical issues such as the WiFi quality. 

Residence life issues were raised by several candidates. Nilesh Mandhyan, an independent candidate, noted the location of washing machines in RHs 4 and 5 in the washrooms, causing difficulties for students. Zara Javed, another independent candidate, campaigned about making RHs better, mentioning hot water availability and installation of water filters to prevent hard water. Candidates Manicka Kumar and Hargun Singh talked about making RHs 6 and 7 more self-sufficient and equipped with facilities like tuckshops. 

The academic policies, mainly the selection of Foundation Courses (FCs), also became a majorly discussed issue. Javed suggested increasing course caps and making the new FC policy more flexible. The USF candidate Shreevats Shukla talked about making the shopping week better and more accommodating for the batch by providing more information, including sample lectures, to help students make better decisions. In response to the question about how candidates will work with the AUSG to ensure equal access to facilities, Shukla brought up the new FC policy and how it creates gaps between juniors and seniors and prevents their interaction.

Another majorly discussed issue was that of ideology. Introducing a new collective, United Ashoka, Sohraab Singh mentioned an ideological divide and said, “I feel that student politics hardly ever involves ideology.”  He said, “populist rhetoric has destroyed the efficacy of the SG,” and that the collective is non-ideological and inclusive of as many people as possible. Mandhyan said, “Politics on campus is very divided. It's about factions, collectives, and ideologies, and it's very complicated. It looks complicated to somebody who’s an outsider. 

Independent candidate Manicka Kumar mentioned the need for digitising and centralising facilities at Ashoka. When asked about equal access to facilities, she suggested digitising these facilities and letting people book slots for the same on the Ashoka app. Mandhyan countered, suggesting digitisation might be tough given that people use these facilities impromptu. 

A major point of contention between candidates and senior audiences became the AUSG systems and procedures and the candidates’ lack of awareness regarding the same. Independent candidate Pranav Chandrashekhar responded that he had been through policies, voting records, and minutes of meetings. Various candidates admitted to not knowing about the proceedings and apologised for the same. 

Young India Fellowship (YIF) Council

Among the YIF candidates, the recurring theme was bridging the gap between the fellows and undergraduate students. Ahmad Yasin discussed how staying off campus prevented YIF students from interacting with undergraduate students and suggested conducting informal town halls between the two to bridge the gap. Abhishek Sharma suggested that bridging the gap can be fruitful, as YIF students bring industry experience and UG students bring the experience of on-campus living. 

Another major issue for the YIF cohort was the lack of recreational spaces and proper dining facilities. Shambhavi Gupta highlighted this, calling for the creation of an interim room at the earliest, before a permanent recreational space for YIF fellows on the university campus is made available. An audience member brought to attention the lack of nutritional value and protein intake in the meals served at the IIT Delhi-Sonipat campus where the fellows have been housed. The candidates acknowledged and agreed with the concerns and suggested discussing the issue with the YIF programme team and also IIT fellows to see whether they face the same issues.

Another issue noticed by candidates and audience alike was the fellows’ participation in Ashoka events. Yasin noted that he had talked with the YIF team and, given this is a hectic course, there is less time for clubs and societies, and they would try to hold YIF-specific events. Gupta highlighted that there would be a shift in class slots from 2:30 PM to 3 PM to avoid clashes between YIF and the UG schedule. Sharma noted that while this may take time, a proper channel is needed to ensure the same. 

With that, the Candidates’ Debates for this election cycle come to an end. 

(Edited by Anamta Hussain and Gauri Deshpande)