Initially, when the ongoing student movement started, it questioned the fairness of the government job quota being applied to the grandchildren. The movement quickly escalated beyond just the quota issue, since the government began to use forceful resistance, including the deployment of the military. The list of lives lost to bullets kept increasing, including the countless who were injured.
Now, whereas academics through their statements and publications have been long known to set moral societal standards, with their ideas and vast array of knowledge in prolonged situations of crisis, the silence, particularly of private university faculties, has become very noticeable. With the exception of a few, why are teachers, who are primarily perceived to be building the backbone of the nation, not seen raising their voices and concerns while their students are being subject to fatal injuries by law enforcement? Why do they feel limitations in supporting their students’ right to protest?
Are university authorities politically inclined?
Although a university authority is expected to preach the acceptance of diverse opinions and ensure an open mind throughout the campus, faculty members of private universities who opine beyond the government's narratives are skeptically observed by the authority. Jobs are often at stake due to affiliations with political parties that are not government allies.
The university's first three positioned personnel, the Vice Chancellor, Pro Vice-Chancellor, and Treasurer are appointed by the President of Bangladesh. Constitutionally, the President has no decision-making power without the government's permission in most cases including this. The supreme authority at universities are therefore likely to be very unwelcoming of not only other political views, but also those that are non-political and for the greater benefit of the students and the society (such as the quota movement), yet against the regime.
The lack of job security
A garment worker in Bangladesh has more rights than a private university teacher like myself. The Labour Act of Bangladesh, which ensures the minimum standard at workplaces does not apply to us. Meaning, we are under the purview of our respective university service rules.
According to the service rules, we would have to file our appeals to the pro-government university authorities as well, and they would eventually decide our fate -- whether to punish or spare us. At least, an employee who falls within the ambit of the Labour Act would be able to seek justice from the court.
Hence, the reality is, even though many of us are doing our best from our personal capacities to be of assistance to our students from the backstage, we have families to feed and most of us are not wealthy enough to risk losing our careers for justifiably speaking out.
A garment worker in Bangladesh has more rights than a private university teacher
The infiltration of student politics
The pro-government student wing has recently been inaugurating its private university committees and subcommittees. As a result, it has become extremely uncomfortable on the part of faculty members to voice any opinions that the BCL might deem offensive.
No teacher intends to be the subject of insults on campus. I should highlight an example -- in the recent past, I was subjected to humiliation on a publicly accessible Facebook post of a BCL leader from my workplace, simply because I opposed the idea of student politics in private universities on my online account and shared an old article that I had written in this regard. His post was an attack personally extended towards me and my family. Although his words lacked any form of constructive criticism, what makes it worse is that he is a direct student of mine, whom I always had a pleasant relationship with, both inside and outside the classroom.
If you are wondering whether the university authority is aware of the aforementioned scenario. Yes, they are! Did I expect a proctorial intervention or an action on the part of university administrators? No. Why? Because it is only expected that BCL members would be prioritized at any meetings with the departmental heads since they might have a "soft power" to play on the appointment of chairs or their tenure extensions.
Any university authority would perhaps be compelled to give BCL members easier access, simply because an influential ruling party leader, or even anyone from the Education Ministry is only a call away. Let alone teachers with different political views, any neutral faculty in the future might find it difficult to provide a BCL member with a deserving grade, due to external or pressures from "upstairs."
Even though a few public university academics are known to make bold statements in the media, it is saddening that such might not be the case for private universities. Even Vice Chancellor, Pro Vice-Chancellor, or the Treasurer nominees would have to practise a shameful demeanour in building a rapport with the BCL to cement their respective positions and power.
One of my former teachers and now colleague had once rightly pointed out that private universities are no different than private business entities or shops. We are worse off than employees of corporate entities. Our hands are tightly tied. I do not intend to speak for others, but personally, I hope my students accept my heartfelt apologies for not being able to do enough for them. I feel ashamed to call myself an academic when I could not even stand properly against the unjust aggression extended to my students.
My dear students, please forgive me and take care of yourselves.
Advocate Saquib Rahman is a political analyst and Editor of Progress Magazine. He teaches law at North South University.
