We are extracting below the important
observations made in the Report of the First GNLU Review Commission for
Stripped Law readers. The full report is available for download below.
1. The
Commission met and interacted with students. The students enthusiastically
welcomed the initiative and agreed to consult their friends in their respective
classes and gather suggestions for submission to the Commission. Some of them
submitted a voluminous memorandum of facts and opinions on which the Commission
did interact with them as well as with the members of the teaching staff.
2. Regulation
No.8 (dealing with Search Committee) has Clause (4) which states, the Executive
Council may also recommend the name of a person other than those recommended by
the Search Committee, if it has reason to believe that such other person is
having regard to the interests of the university suitable to the post of the
Director.
This clause
(4), in effect, nullifies the recommendations of the Search Committee and tends
to defeat the very purpose of a search by an expert group. Further it provides for
the appointment of a person whose name may not have been found fit by the
Search Committee, or even rejected by the Search Committee. This provision – Clause (4) – in fact, makes
a mockery of the provision for a Search Committee.
The Commission
is of the view that the Government needs to review the provision in the best
interests of the institution. It is submitted that this clause (4) be omitted
and to ensure transparency in the appointment of the Director, such appointment
should be made only from amongst the panel of three persons recommended by the
Search Committee. In case the appointing authority finds difficulty to accept
any of the three names, let it ask for a fresh panel from the search committee.
This is what is being done in appointment of heads of institutions to ensure
credibility, transparency and respect for the office.
3. As
the Registrar is the head of the administrative and ministerial staff of the
university and the principal officer responsible on all matters pertaining to
the administration of the university, it is desirable to appoint a regular
whole time Registrar and put an end to the present practice of appointing an
officiating Registrar by the Director from amongst the teaching staff of the
university.
4. The
university is functioning through its various committees, each having a
definite mandate and each contributing to the management of the affairs of the
University.
As there are no
Professors, these committees are headed by Associate/Asst. Professors,
necessarily lacking the requisite experience in the matters concerned. Lack of
guidance by senior teachers in these committees adversely affects the
functioning of the university. Many of
these committees deal with important academic matters where junior staff
members lacking experience of taking decisions manage the affairs just to keep
things functioning. This is a sad situation which needs correction.
5. Appointment
of experienced Professors to lead and guide various academic and administrative
activities is highly desirable in the interests of the overall development of
the university.
6. It
is submitted that an effective grievances redressal mechanism need to be set
up, or the existing arrangement revamped, so as to inspire confidence amongst
the students and the teachers, that their concerns will be effectively
addressed by the administration.
7. Effective
steps may be initiated to set up a Students Bar Association or a Representative
Council and a Faculty Consultative Council so as to provide constructive outlet
to ventilate the aspirations of the students and teachers.
8. The
idea of giving liberal scholarships and fee exemptions to deserving students
admitted on merit is a good policy and deserves to be continued and
expanded. The principle of equity and
inclusiveness which is a national norm in higher education has to be endorsed
and encouraged.
Given the
reservations in student admission, there is need for the university to identify
early those who need additional help to be able to cope up with the high
demands of study at GNLU. Special
coaching, mentorship and individual guidance by senior teachers in the first or
second semesters would certainly help the weak students to cope up with the
high demands of legal studies. Repeat
examinations have to be discouraged as it tends to stigmatize and take away
attention from their studies.
9. A
world class university should be able to dispense with attendance requirement
in course of time by motivating everyone voluntarily to participate in
learning. Learning is seriously impaired
in an atmosphere of mistrust between the teachers and students. GNLU needs to take these issues seriously and
work out strategies in consultation with students to ensure voluntary obedience
to the rules and regulations of the University.
10. Many
applicants for teaching positions are just looking for an employment. They have no experience in the theory or
practice of teaching as that is not part of the LL.M. curriculum or NET
programme. Some of them have false
notions of teaching from the way they themselves have been taught with the
result they don’t even care to learn better teaching techniques. Given this situation, the university has no
option but to prepare their own teachers through an year long well-organized Teaching
Fellowship Programme.
11. It
appears from responses received from teachers that there is not adequate
communication between the Director and members of the Faculty. They seem to be aggrieved of academic
decisions being taken unilaterally without consultation, seminars being
organized without an institutional purpose, non-academic activities being
imposed without consultation and grievances are not promptly and properly
addressed to create a conducive environment for collectively taking the
university forward. Without taking sides
on the issue, the Commission would suggest the authorities to follow a policy
of consultative decision making on academic matters through weekly or fortnightly
Faculty meetings and recording and circulating the minutes for action by all
concerned including the Director.
12. Already
teachers are grudging that they are being compelled to stay on the campus for
eight hours a day which they consider to be violative of UGC rules!! There is need for change of this attitude and
teachers should voluntarily stay in the accommodation provided by the
university. The Director should himself
stay in the campus. If sufficient
accommodation is not available yet in the campus for all its teachers, the
authorities must consider buying or hiring a group of flats in the nearby
apartment clusters and making them available to teachers free of rent.
13. Number
of training programmes is being organized from time to time depending upon
requests from other agencies. The
Resource Persons are invited from outside GNLU.
How does it help GNLU in its mandate when it is not able to enrich its
intellectual or material resources. It
is recommended that GNLU may consider establishing an Institute for Continuing
Legal Education (ICLE) in view of the felt need and demand for CLE among the
legal profession and law teaching community.
14.
To be able to develop a work culture of devotion
to scholarship, endeavour to do things better and commitment to academic
values, the senior faculty has responsibilities to perform. This work culture
is not the product of laws and regulations or rewards and punishments alone.
They develop through taking everybody into confidence in ‘decision making’,
adopting best practices from elsewhere, developing powers and functions to
functionaries at all levels and projecting a common vision carefully crafted.
This is not to say that these are absent in GNLU, but only to emphasise their
importance when one aspires to become world class in a highly competitive environment.
15.
GNLU reportedly functions through Committees.
Are the committees democratically constituted? Are they given clear mandate,
independent authority, and accountability? What is the relationship between the
Committee and the Director? How the Committees’ functioning is co-ordinated,
audited and assessed? The management culture reflects on academic quality and
efficiency of every educational institution.
There are complaints the faculty raised in the constitution and functioning
of the Committee system at GNLU. The Commission would only appeal to the
authorities including the Director to have a close look at the system and see
where corrections are needed to make their functioning smooth, productive and
consultative.
16.
Public relations is part of legitimate image
building of an institution. But when it is overdone it boomerangs particularly
when the internal structures and processes are weak, and if there is even a
modicum of discontent among the staff or students. Promising more than one can
offer through prospectus, advertisements and leaflets should be eschewed. The
policy should be to let the programmes speak for itself. This is not to say
that GNLU is guilty of it but to empazise a point. After all, for an
institution which is still in its infancy, one cannot expect miracles to happen
in an environment where academic institutions or even long standing are finding
difficult to innovate, experiment and change styles of teaching/learning.
17.
During the Commission’s interaction with
students it was revealed that there are communication gaps between the students
and the administration and there are apprehension of victimisation if they take
up their grievances. Even a section of Faculty complained of actions “demeaning
the honour of faculty”, too many seminars and training programmes unrelated to
faculty/student interests and “conducted for name sake”, appointment of
unqualified and inexperienced wardens in hostels etc.
Apparently,
the system of grievance redressal is not functioning effectively and there is
some amount of suppressed feelings both among faculty and students unrecognised
by the administration. The Commission has not probed the problem further to be
able to pass any judgment on the issue; but we want to flag the issue that
there is some amount of simmering discontent which need to be addressed by the
administration in the best interest of the institution.
18.
The University spends over Rupees Twelve crores
every year to run the institution. The Government has spent nearly 150 crores
of rupees to develop the infra-structure. In return for such investments, the
University is now able to give education for a total of about 1200 law students
each year. The per capita expenditure is fairly high compared to the
expenditure on legal education elsewhere in the State. 76% of the expenditure
is recovered as student fees. This can be justified only in terms of high
quality education offered comparable to the best in the circumstances. In other
words, GNLU may sooner or later will be confronted with the issue of quality of
instruction in relation to the quantity of fees collected. Public may ask
whether the society is getting due return for the investment of tax payers’
money particularly when graduates tend to migrate to the private corporate
sector. GNLU now tries to offset such criticism by way of offering a variety of
services to corporates, Governments, sister institutions and civil society. All
these need to be constantly reviewed to justify the liberal investment
Government has made on the institution.