New Delhi: The administration of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) issued a strong advisory urging a group of students to reconsider their plans of conducting a discussion on the recent Manipur violence on campus.
Despite the administration’s warning, the organizers, a group called ‘THE COLLECTIVE’, stated that the event would proceed as scheduled.
The discussion, as per ‘THE COLLECTIVE’, was slated to commence at 9:30 pm at Ganga Dhaba. However, the JNU administration pointed out that no prior permission had been sought for the event.
Also Read: Nothing like this happened before: Congress on Manipur violence
In a statement, the university stated, “It has come to the notice of the administration that a group of students, under the name of ‘THE COLLECTIVE,’ has released a pamphlet announcing a discussion on happenings in Manipur scheduled to be held at Ganga Dhaba. No prior permission for this event was taken from the JNU Administration.”
The administration emphasized that such activities had the potential to disrupt the peace and harmony of the university campus.
Also Read: Meghalaya: HNLC hopes positive but says peace talks may not be successful
They firmly advised the students involved to cancel the proposed program immediately.
According to the pamphlet circulated by ‘THE COLLECTIVE,’ the discussion aimed to gain a deeper understanding of the ongoing situation in Manipur.
It invited students to participate in a discourse on the socio-cultural context of the crisis and the role of the state.
The panellists mentioned were Dr Thongkholal Haokip from the Centre for the Study of Law and Governance at JNU, Dr Praem Hidam from the School of Law, Governance, and Citizenship at BR Ambedkar University, and Nandita Haksar, a senior human rights lawyer and author.
Responding to the advisory, Sourya Majumdar, the joint secretary of ‘THE COLLECTIVE,’ stated that there was no rule against holding a discussion without seeking permission.
Majumdar affirmed their intention to proceed with the planned discussion, questioning why permission had suddenly become mandatory and dismissing the notion that a peaceful discourse could disturb the university’s tranquillity.