Answer

Introduction

Recent cases like the suicide of a 19-year-old student in Odisha have brought into focus the deep-rooted gender  and caste-based structural discrimination and apathy in Indian universities. These cases underline not only the failure of redressal mechanisms but also the persistent silencing of marginalised students in educational spaces.

Body

Shortcomings in Redressal Mechanisms

• Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) lack autonomy and efficacy: Most ICCs are seen as symbolic bodies that function under administrative control, failing to safeguard victims’ rights.
  Eg: In the Odisha case, the ICC remained non-functional despite prior complaints, exposing its ineffectiveness in preventing sexual harassment.
• SC/ST Cells are structurally weak and under-resourced: SC/ST Cells, mandated by UGC, lack resources, autonomy, and accountability, often reducing themselves to bureaucratic formalities.
• Power imbalance between students and perpetrators: Victims often face harassment from persons in authority such as faculty members or dominant caste peers, making redress difficult.
• Silencing of marginalised voices through institutional apathy: There is a pattern of neglect and dismissal of concerns raised by Dalit, Adivasi, and women students.
• Absence of time-bound and independent grievance processes: Redressal often lacks clear timelines or independent oversight, discouraging victims from pursuing justice.
• Lack of democratic and inclusive mechanisms: Current mechanisms exclude student participation and function top-down, ignoring the lived realities of marginalised students.
  Eg: The replacement of JNU’s GSCASH with ICC marked a shift from a democratic, student-participative model to an administrative one.

Suggested Reforms for Inclusive and Safe Educational Spaces

• Enactment of the ‘Rohith Act’ for caste-based accountability: There is a need for a comprehensive law addressing institutional responsibility in caste-based discrimination and student suicides.
• Revival of participatory redressal mechanisms like GSCASH: Institutions must adopt models with democratic representation and autonomy for handling gender-based complaints.
• Strengthening autonomy and resources for SC/ST Cells: These bodies must be given independent status, adequate funding, and real authority to address caste-based grievances.
  Eg: UGC must revise its guidelines to empower SC/ST Cells for proactive engagement rather than formality-driven responses.
• Integration of radical caste-gender sensitisation programmes: Awareness efforts should be emotionally transformative and grounded in ethical engagement, not checkbox compliance.
• Legal and institutional protection against retaliation: Victims and whistleblowers need robust protection mechanisms to report abuse without fear.
• Creation of safe spaces for expression and solidarity: Institutions must nurture forums where marginalised students can express trauma and find community support.
• Accountability audits of universities: Periodic third-party audits of grievance mechanisms and inclusivity standards should be mandated.

Conclusion

The growing crisis of student suicides and harassment reflects the structural rot within India’s educational institutions. Legal measures like the Rohith Act, participatory grievance redressal mechanisms, and a shift in institutional culture towards empathy and justice are urgent. Only when marginalised students are truly heard, protected, and empowered can campuses become inclusive spaces of learning and dignity.

DOWNLOAD PDF