The J.M. Lyngdoh Committee on electoral reforms shows complete lack of comprehension about the philosophical postulates that underly the system of democratic elections in India’s colleges and universities. The Committee’s recommendations for cleansing the so-called evils of electoral democracy as practiced by students are not only superficial, they also reveal the fact that the honourable members have no idea of the goals and purposes of participatory democracy in educational institutions. Higher education in a democracy is expected to perform multiple and diverse intellectual and social goals. One of the most important is to train young students in the theory and praxis of citizenship. The first and foremost lesson for citizenship is that young and educated students should learn to exercise their democratic rights. For this purpose, they should develop the capacity to make their own decisions.When the political class decided to lower the age of voters from 21 to 18 years, the rationale was arguably that adults of the age of 18 are capable of shouldering their responsibilities as citizens. Yet, we continue to treat young adults as untrustworthy for negotiating any social role including the management of their own elections. It is not only political parties which can become the villains of this piece — faculty members, principals and vice-chancellors who are actively involved in the supervision of student elections, but who may have their own axes to grind, can also play that role. Elections should be for, by and of the students. Adult students should be left to their own resources to manage their own affairs outside the class rooms. Else, what is the point of constantly teaching them that vigilance is a pre-requisite for the functioning of a healthy democracy? The Indian educational system is not only based on a trust deficit, it also encourages passivity among students. A democratically active student community is the best safeguard against distortions in electoral democracy. If a thinking group of educated citizens cannot protect their own freedom of choice, any palliatives are bound to prove ineffective. The model of elections by students themselves suggested here is meant to achieve a gradual enhancement in the spirit of civic consciousness among educated adults of India. If students cannot elect their representatives on the basis of their own free choice, if proves that the educational system has failed to create inquiring minds in society. We must stop looking upon student politics as a suspect activity. We must learn to leave students alone to find their own solutions. Public policy makers and academic administrators must answer a basic question: If students cannot manage their own internal affairs today, can they be trusted to manage the public affairs of a vast democratic country tomorrow? If India is advertised as a knowledge society, those pursuing knowledge cannot be treated as incapable in the art of self-governance.
