University of Delhi Takes Action Against Election Defacement: Steps Toward Cleaner Campuses and Electoral Reforms.
11 November 2024
Education >> Miscellaneous
The University of Delhi (DU) is taking significant steps to address the issue of defacement and damage to public property caused during the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) elections for the academic year 2024-2025. This move comes in response to an ongoing legal application filed by a petitioner, seeking directions from the Delhi High Court for the removal of defaced posters, hoardings, graffiti, and other forms of damage to public walls and property across Delhi, allegedly caused by the campaigning of student political outfits during the DUSU elections.
The Petition and Court's Intervention:
The applicant, in the present application, has asserted that the DUSU elections have resulted in widespread damage to public property in violation of civil, penal, and electoral guidelines. The damage, according to the petitioner, is in blatant contravention of the undertakings given by the candidates and goes against the guidelines set forth by the Lyngdoh Committee, as well as various previous court orders. The petitioner urged the court to issue directions to the concerned authorities to take action against those responsible for defacing public property.
The Delhi High Court has been actively involved in monitoring the situation, issuing several orders from time to time to ensure that necessary steps are taken to clean the defaced areas. A Defacement Assessment Committee has been constituted by the University of Delhi, which includes representatives from various municipal bodies such as the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC). The committee's task is to assess the financial losses incurred due to the defacement and formulate compensation plans while also fixing accountability for the election-related damage.
Measures Taken by Delhi University:
In a recent status report, the Chief Election Officer of the DUSU elections, Professor Satyapal Singh, informed the court that significant progress has been made in cleaning up the defaced areas across DU's North and South Campuses. Nearly all hoardings, banners, graffiti, and posters have been removed, and the affected premises have been cleaned and repainted. Photographs of the cleaned premises have been annexed to the report as evidence of the efforts taken by the university.
Additionally, a DUSU Election Reforms Committee has been constituted, which submitted a set of recommendations aimed at preventing future defacement and ensuring cleaner, more responsible campaigning in future elections. These reforms include measures such as increasing the number of designated 'Walls of Democracy' on campus for posting election-related materials, imposing fines or disciplinary action for defacement, and creating dedicated online platforms to raise awareness about the issue and report violations.
Key Recommendations for Election Reform:
The report submitted by the DUSU Election Reforms Committee outlines several key recommendations that aim to reduce the prevalence of defacement during election seasons. Some of the prominent suggestions include:
Strict Adherence to Guidelines: Ensuring that all election-related activities, including the posting of posters, are in strict compliance with existing guidelines and court orders.
Orientation and Sensitization: Organizing orientation programs at the time of student admission to sensitize new students about the importance of maintaining discipline and respecting public property during elections.
Anti-Defacement Affidavit: Similar to the anti-ragging affidavit, students may be required to sign an anti-defacement affidavit at the time of admission, committing not to deface university property.
Bond for Candidates: Candidates contesting for DUSU or college union elections may be required to execute a bond to the tune of ?1 lakh, which would be forfeited if any defacement occurs during their election campaign.
Designated Walls of Democracy: As per the guidelines of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and previous court orders, each college, department, and campus would be required to designate specific spaces for the posting of election materials, eliminating the practice of defacing walls and public property.
Accountability for Misspelled Names: Candidates whose names appear on defaced materials, even if done without their knowledge, will be held accountable unless they take immediate action to remove the materials and report the incident to the authorities.
Use of Electronic Media: The use of electronic platforms for campaigning will be encouraged, while the use of posters and banners will be restricted to the designated 'Walls of Democracy.'
Vigilance and Enforcement: College authorities, including principals and deans, will be made responsible for ensuring compliance with these guidelines and for taking appropriate action against violators.
Women's Representation: The reforms also propose measures to improve gender parity in the elections, such as reserving one post of office-bearer for women on a rotational basis.
Revised Election Structure: The proposal also includes a shift towards a two-tier election process, with each college or department conducting elections at their level before electing DUSU office-bearers, as suggested in the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations.
Court's Role and Student Commitments:
During the court proceedings, the students involved in the defacement were given a chance to rectify their actions. Several student candidates, including those from major political outfits such as ABVP and NSUI, have filed affidavits undertaking to clean the defaced sites and participate in cleaning drives across their campuses. The students have committed to ensuring that the defaced public property, particularly near college campuses, is cleaned within a week. The university has been tasked with verifying compliance and submitting a status report to the court within ten days.
While the court acknowledged the positive steps taken so far, it emphasized the need for a culture of responsibility among students. The court recognized that the primary goal of the proceedings is not punitive but reformative, stressing that students should understand their role in preserving public property for future generations.
Conclusion:
This ongoing case is a landmark in the pursuit of cleaner campuses and more responsible electoral processes at the University of Delhi. The comprehensive measures being implemented by the university, along with the reforms suggested by the Election Reforms Committee, aim to curb the rampant defacement seen in past elections. By enforcing stricter regulations, creating awareness among students, and holding candidates accountable, the University of Delhi hopes to set a precedent for future elections, not just within the campus but across educational institutions in India.
The hope is that these efforts will foster a sense of respect for public and university infrastructure, ensuring that the next generation of students can enjoy a cleaner and more vibrant campus.