AFTER TWO DECADES WITHOUT POLLS, JAMIA PROMISES STUDENT UNION ELECTIONS AMID CAMPUS AGITATION

October 26, 2026

Jamia Millia Islamia in New Delhi has agreed to hold students’ union elections within 15 days of the approval of the union’s constitution, revoked disciplinary notices issued to students during the ongoing agitation and announced an inquiry into the conduct of security personnel. The decision, announced on Monday, October 26, follows nearly two weeks of protests and hunger strikes demanding the restoration of elected student representation at the university, where union elections have not been held since 2006.

The university’s order, issued by Registrar Md Mahtab Alam Rizvi, came after the administration considered a list of demands submitted by students participating in the agitation and their representatives. Alongside the election commitment, the order withdrew suspension orders and show-cause notices issued during the protest period and provided for a committee to examine the conduct of security staff.

The decision marks a significant development in a dispute that has brought student representation, disciplinary action and the administration’s handling of demonstrations to the centre of campus politics. However, the election commitment remains conditional: polling is to take place 15 days after the students’ union constitution is approved, and the order does not specify when that approval must be completed.

The agitation was launched to demand the restoration of the Jamia Millia Islamia Students’ Union (JMISU), which has remained inactive since 2006. Students argued that the prolonged absence of elected representation had deprived them of a formal platform through which to raise grievances and participate in decisions affecting campus life. Four students had reportedly been on an indefinite hunger strike, while other protesters joined sit-ins and demonstrations to press the university for a definite election schedule.

The administration had earlier constituted a committee to draft the students’ union constitution. The move, however, failed to satisfy the protesters, who maintained that the formation of a drafting committee was insufficient without a clear timetable for approving the constitution and conducting elections. Their demands also included the withdrawal of disciplinary measures imposed during the agitation and an investigation into allegations concerning the behaviour of security personnel.

Tensions escalated in the days preceding Monday’s announcement. The university shifted classes to online mode and advised students to avoid visiting the campus, citing concerns about safety and security. Access to parts of the campus, including gates and libraries, was also restricted. The measures further intensified the dispute between the administration and students seeking to continue their protest.

The university’s order addresses three central demands: the resumption of union elections following approval of the constitution, withdrawal of protest-related suspension and show-cause notices, and an inquiry into security personnel’s conduct. The administration has also stipulated conditions for the protesters. According to the order, students have undertaken to issue a public apology at a press conference for defamatory statements, actions or social media posts directed against the administration during the agitation. Such posts are to be removed from social media platforms immediately, with compliance monitored by the university.

The order directed that the protest be called off immediately after its issuance. Nevertheless, the announcement did not resolve every point of contention. Some protesters argued that the absence of a deadline for approving the constitution left the election schedule uncertain. Students also raised demands concerning university officials that were not addressed in the order, and reports indicated that some participants intended to continue the agitation despite the administration’s announcement.

The dispute therefore reflects a broader disagreement over whether procedural assurances are sufficient to restore confidence between students and university authorities. For the administration, the new order provides a framework for moving towards elections while requiring the protest to end. For students who remain dissatisfied, the key question is whether the constitutional approval process will proceed promptly and lead to elections within the promised period.

The proposed inquiry into security personnel’s conduct is another important element of the agreement. Students had sought accountability over the handling of the protests, while tensions between demonstrators and campus security had become a significant source of confrontation. The inquiry will need to examine the relevant incidents and establish the facts before any conclusions about individual responsibility can be reached.

The developments at Jamia have also drawn attention to the wider importance of elected student bodies in universities. Student unions can provide a representative mechanism for addressing concerns related to academic conditions, campus facilities, disciplinary proceedings and institutional policies. Their functioning, however, depends on clear rules, transparent elections and a workable relationship between elected representatives and university administrations.

Jamia’s decision creates a pathway towards the restoration of its students’ union after an absence of nearly two decades. Whether it brings a lasting end to the agitation will depend on the timely approval of the constitution, the implementation of the election schedule and the resolution of remaining disagreements over the handling of the protests.

For now, the central commitment is clear: the university has announced that elections will be held 15 days after the union constitution receives approval. The next decisive step will be determining when that approval takes place and whether the promised process proceeds according to the announced timetable.