Former JNU scholars back Prof Bimol Akoijam, question due process in dismissal

Former MPhil and PhD students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) have expressed solidarity with Professor A Bimol Akoijam following his dismissal, alleging procedural irregularities, breach of confidentiality and what they described as a politically charged media trial.

In a statement issued on October 15, the former scholars from JNU's Centre for the Study of Social Systems (CSSS) rejected the allegations and the major punishment imposed on Akoijam, arguing that the fairness of any decision depends on adherence to due process.

They alleged that the case had been handled in a rushed manner and questioned the sequence of events surrounding the inquiry report and the dismissal order.

The former students claimed that the inquiry report and the dismissal order appeared to have been issued on the same day, with the order circulating publicly almost immediately. They also cited Akoijam's statement that he had not been furnished with the inquiry report before the punishment was imposed.

The signatories argued that this sequence raised concerns about the principle of audi alteram partem — the requirement that a person be given a fair opportunity to respond before an adverse decision is taken.

Students allege breach of confidentiality

The former scholars also accused those involved in the case of failing to protect confidentiality under Section 16 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, commonly known as the POSH Act.

They claimed that details of the allegations, the committee's findings and the dismissal order had circulated in the media and on social media, creating what they described as a parallel media trial.

According to the statement, the alleged disclosures subjected Akoijam and his family to public humiliation and mental trauma while also raising concerns about the privacy of the complainants.

The former students maintained that a breach of confidentiality could undermine confidence in the process and expose the parties involved to public prejudice.

The allegations of procedural lapses and confidentiality breaches were made by the former students. Their statement did not independently establish whether the inquiry or dismissal violated the applicable legal provisions.

Scholars defend his teaching methods

Describing Akoijam as a mentor who provided academic and personal support to students from diverse social and cultural backgrounds, the signatories defended his teaching methods and approach to classroom discussions.

They said his teaching encouraged critical thinking on gender, sexuality, politics and society, and that these subjects formed part of his courses at JNU.

The former scholars cited readings and theoretical frameworks associated with Masters and Johnson, John Gagnon and William Simon, Michel Foucault, Andrea Dworkin, Sudhir Kakar and Anthony Giddens to explain the academic context in which topics such as romantic relationships and sexuality were discussed.

They also defended his use of films in teaching, saying screenings were intended to facilitate discussions on concepts such as the male gaze and gender representation in cinema.

According to the statement, discussions and screenings were part of his established teaching practice and should be understood in their academic context.

The former students further said that research scholars frequently gathered at his on-campus residence for reading groups, collective academic discussions and social interaction. They rejected what they described as attempts to portray such gatherings and academic exchanges as inherently predatory.

Reject allegation over marks

The signatories also rejected the allegation that Akoijam had sought sexual favours in exchange for extra marks, describing it as a fabrication.

They said viva examinations under his supervision were intended to assess students' conceptual understanding of course material rather than simply determine marks. Some of the former students said they had attended vivas as observers or appeared for them as students.

The statement emphasised that the former scholars were speaking from their own experiences of his teaching and academic supervision.

However, their defence of Akoijam's teaching methods and their objections to the handling of the case represent their position on the controversy and do not, by themselves, determine the merits of the allegations or the findings of the inquiry.

Pledge continued support

The former students said they stood firmly with Akoijam and condemned what they described as a flawed process and an unethical media trial that had affected him and his family.

They argued that procedural fairness was essential regardless of the nature of the allegations, maintaining that the merits of a case could not be assessed independently of the process through which a decision was reached.

The statement was signed by 13 former MPhil and PhD students of Akoijam, including T. Longkoi Khiamniungan, Jyoti Das, Rimlee Das, Himakshi Choudhury, Khadeeja Mangat, Sweta, Azad Pusham, Priyanka Kshetrimayum, Sushant Gaurav, Chabungbam Babina, Gopi Tadaka, Yusoof Ali and Sanam Sharief Khan.