He had set two objectionable questions. One required the students to answer whether stone throwers were real heroes.
And another asked for a translation into English of an Urdu passage which accused state government of genocide in Kashmir. Bhat has been charged under unlawful activities prevention act and is presently under ten day remand.
However, even while dust was yet to settle down on Bhat’s case, another case has come to light. This time, it is the university professor Shad Ramzan who is alleged to have set an obscene question in this year’s Kashmiri language paper for BA first year.
The said question, also a translation exercise, is a passage in English which gives a graphic description of woman’s body. The professor has now been booked under the sections of law that address moral turpitude. Police says that the cognizable nature of the offence warranted action against Ramzan. Police has also started investigating the role of the supervisory authority which allowed the paper at the examination.
However, while a raging debate is going on about the nature of the transgressions that the two teachers may have been guilty of, it is the intervention of the police that has complicated matters. It appears implausible if not illegal for police to act against the teachers before Kashmir University could do so. Or for Kashmir University to watch silently on the side while police deals with the alleged violations of the professional norms by academicians.
While it is nobody’s case to defend – or not to defend – the teachers in question, one can’t but feel uneasy about the involvement of the police in academics and in an area where it is least qualified to sit on judgement. One simple question: Is it beyond the institutional capacity of our highest seat of learning to deal with such indiscretions.
A routine official explanation or at the maximum the suspension for the teachers would have sent the same message across and with far less controversy and of course the bad taste. But the police choosing to play Rambo has spoiled the situation. In fact, Kashmir University is not any less to blame. It has not only chosen to remain silent through this affair but has abdicated its responsibility towards its teachers.
Moreover, while it has been at ease with police taking over the role of disciplining its academics, it is also guilty of covering up of the lapses of its supervisory mechanism in both the cases. Were the two teachers in question absolutely in charge of drawing up their two papers and ensuring these go to their respective examinations? In every likelihood, not.
So, it should be fair to conclude that the two were scapegoated for what were essentially University’s own sins. However, the larger debate and conflict still is about the institutional autonomy of Kashmir University which also gives it authority to deal with its own staff and the police surmounting it. But here the situation is even worse.
The university seems to be closely colluding with the police in the matter.