 Good evening and welcome to NewsClick. As you might have read or heard, in the past day or two, the HRLC sent several notices to JNU students to try and understand the issue more and to know why this has happened. We have with us JNU student activist, Umar Khalid. So, Umar, what exactly, if we can start with, is the HRLC? And why were these notices sent and what is the role? I mean, before I go into the history of the HRLC, just to sort of give an immediate background, two days back, notices were issued to us. It was on the same day that I was clearing my dues in the university, preparing to leave the university. Two hours later, I get to know that there have been notices issued based on an inquiry which has been going on and on for the past two years, on and off, I mean, despite intervention of court. And I was told that I've been rusticated for the next semester. And I also have a fine of 20,000 rupees. The next day, I got the notice, I went to the university admin block and I got the notice. And it said that this was on the basis of the 9th February incident and that they've been inquiring into. Now, this HRLC was constituted on 12th of February, if I'm not wrong, 12th or 13th of February 2016. Just the day Kanhaiya got arrested. And during the period when we were in jail, this inquiry happened in our absence. And then it came out with a verdict sort of finding us guilty. A couple of months later, they pronounced the punishments and they pronounced us guilty. Now, as people might have heard in the news reports that this HRLC report expels me or rusticates me for a semester from JNU. I want to make it clear that this is not the first time that they've rusticated me. This is actually the third time in the last two years that they've rusticated me. And twice already, the court has sidelined it and sort of wrapped the JNU administration for not following due procedure for inquiry and not having a fair probe. Third inquiry, they once again go back and stick to the same kind of, the same set of findings that they had. I mean, these are all pre-determined findings, so nothing changes. And the entire inquiry procedure is just also a formality that they go through. So, without giving us a chance to depose, without giving us a chance to cross-examine, without giving us a chance to actually know who are the people who have deposed against us, they once again pronounce us guilty. And like the previous times, we are going to challenge it in the court and we are confident that this will be the worst. So, talking about the inquiry, taking from that, you have made several claims and when we previously spoke, you said that the inquiry, during the inquiry period when the HRLC report was being conducted, it was quite unfair. So, do you want to throw some light on that? Why do you think the whole, I mean the committee meetings and the inquiry, why was it unfair? See, any inquiry, any trial has a very important basis, the principle of natural justice, which is that the person whom you are accusing of should know what the accusations against him or her are and should have a fair chance to sort of defend himself or herself and present their side of the story. We never had that chance. So, the first thing I said was that the HRLC started the inquiry in February 2016. So, it ended on the 14th of March. We had returned from jail on the 18th of March. There were many processes like this, dates like this. For example, on 26th of February, we were called to a deposition. At that time, we were in jail. We couldn't come to a deposition and this is known by the GNU administration. 18th of February, 16th of February. That was the time when there was such a special atmosphere that we were in hiding for a few days. At that time, we were called to a deposition. GNU administration knew that we couldn't come to a deposition at that time. When we came back from jail, they could try to give us a chance to listen. But that chance was never given. And that chance was not given until today. That we could protect ourselves. We know who are the people who have deposed against us. We can cross-examine them. Because all these things are different things from our country. There are different bodies of justice in the university. These are all established procedures. They violate all those established procedures. And today, I was reading in the telegraph report. That this inquiry process relies on a guard testimony. The guard testimony which was made by the D.M. report by the Delhi government. He told us that these are false statements. Because when the guard was told that he didn't know who Umar Khalid was. He said that Umar Khalid was wearing a national dress. He saw the video and asked him who Umar Khalid was. He didn't know who Umar Khalid was. If he was punished based on that, then you can understand that this is a fairness. And I have told him that this is a politically motivated. It's a biased inquiry. It's an inquiry which is done with a lot of vendetta. Because they have to, by hook or by crook, prove something that is not there. So when you have to prove something that is not there, you sort of invent things. And that is what has happened from day one. So in the backdrop of... I mean, okay, if you look at it, your PhD subject, and a lot of others is just a few days away from today. And what a few months away are the student elections in January. And the new semester will start. So we see that now you've talked about vendetta. We see that the HLEC report has come up in this backdrop. So what do you have to say about that? One thing I would like to say, this is not just about me or about the 10, 15 people who have been punished by the HLEC. This has become a pattern in January. It's become a pattern where people who students who are raising their voice, not just in JNU, actually, across the country. But if I specifically talk about the JNU model of witch hunt that is going on, is... Whenever a voice is raised, before the semester starts, there is a punishment on it. There is a fine on it. There is a suspend on it. And the registration of the semester is made contingent on it. If you pay fine, you will be allowed to register in the semester. If you pay fine, your MFIL PhD will be submitted. It's so criminal that most of these inquiries are just what do I say? These are predetermined inquiries which do not follow any procedure. And then you exploit the vulnerability of a student that if he has to submit a PhD which he has worked for 5 years, he will have to pay fine. He is accepting guilt for something that person has not done. So this is what the vice chancellor has been doing. And it is like every July, every December, you will see 20 people being fined, 20 people being sort of punished in some form or the other. Also, you spoke about the JNU-SU elections. Now the JNU-SU elections, the guidelines, the Lingto committee guidelines say that if you have been punished by the JNU by the university administration, you cannot contest elections. So what they are also doing, that all the opponents of the ABVP, from all left organizations, from bed current organizations, they have ensured that they are disqualified in the election procedure. So ABVP never gets punished for whatever they do. Let's take the most stark example of JNU, Najeeb Ahmad. He was beaten up. There were 22 people who went and deposed. Najeeb went missing the next day. The previous night, there were 22 witnesses who deposed the fact that these people were giving him life threats. They were abusing him on communal lines. There were so many witnesses. They went and deposed. Nothing came out of that inquiry. Nobody was punished. Some people were transferred to a different hostel. We thought that was punishment initially. But when the very same people who were involved in beating up Najeeb, they started contesting elections and some of the students went and inquired in the admin, how come they can contest elections because they have been punished? They have been given a hostile transfer. The JNU admin said, no, that was never a punishment. You look at their orders. We have not said they have been punished. Only for precautionary measures, we have shifted them to another hostel. So you see the bias, you see the difference that here is a set of goondas who have beaten up a person, who have abused him. That person is missing. But nothing happens to them. On the other hand, you have protested against the vice chancellor. Whether you have protested, you have not protested. Many a times one person has been punished that you were cooking biryani in the admin block. Now the fact is that that person was not even there. But what if he was there? I mean, he is cooking biryani or a crime. You were shouting slogans against Atul Johari. Now Atul Johari has been found guilty and not guilty. In fact, there have been so many allegations and all through the way his conduct was. So can someone be punished for shouting slogans against Atul Johari? You have been shouting slogans against the vice chancellor. Is that a crime? You are protesting for student rights. Is that a crime? Is that a crime? So on the one hand, ever since this vice chancellor has come, you will remember a slogan from ABVP after 9th February. Shut down JNU. This vice chancellor has actually been shutting down JNU. Last year there were 1200 seats that were cut from JNU. There was a massive seat cut. 84% seats were not there. That was like shut down JNU happening in actual terms. Reservation has been violated for past two consecutive years. So all of this is happening. At the same time, whoever raises their voice is targeted, is victimized, is insured that their career prospect is at stake, is insured that their university level, politics, the opponents of ABVP are sort of disqualified. So this admin has come with an agenda. That agenda is to destroy this university and to destroy all universities that this regime is doing from FTII to HCU to JNU. And that we have to understand. So in that context, this punishment should be seen. It is not that this punishment is different. Exactly. So taking from what you just said, we are seeing that if we can maybe talk about this assault in light of everything that's been happening in India, especially in the past year, this assault on higher education or maybe just the whole political climate in India. All on central universities and then you said JNU in particular. You see whether it's autonomy, whether it's seat cut or whether it's just this crackdown on student leaders and activists. So do you think like you said, do you think the government is actively now trying to set a narrative or an agenda for the elections that are coming up in 2019? Look, I would like to go back a little bit in this. If we can add one more question to this that why is this kind of intense attack on students? In 2014, when the government came, a lot of people were saying that there was no opposition in the country. On that occasion, the students of this country from different educational institutes played a role in that opposition. Whether it's FTII, HCU, JNU, AMU or Ilhabad University. A lot of people came out of that and they said that the opposition is still alive in this country. People still talk about the right and justice in this country. After that, what was followed, after that, to attack the opposition, FTII, Ilhabad, JNU, HCU, you will see a pattern. That the same things are happening everywhere. The way I am politically motivated in Rohit Vemula's case, when Rohit Vemula was alive, all these cases, all these documents came out later. In such a way, M.H.R.D. has written letters to the administration. You punish them. And that same thing is being done here as well. I mean, I don't have the letters to show you. But if someone comes to the court tomorrow, maybe something is coming out. What kind of interference is being made, the people sitting in the administration, who will talk about the entire government. And today, when elections are about to come, and we are increasing the number of elections, we are increasing the number of elections. So, the narrative of the Indian party is for this election. And if you compare it to the last election, I was saying that there will be good days, there will be development, there will be 15 lakhs for everyone. Every year, there will be 2 crore workers for the youth. The prosperity of the farmers will be over, there will be a minimum support price. There will be a decrease in the number of women. These were all of them. There were a lot of women. Now, the Modi government. Now, all these promises have come true. When we were talking about the elections, the elections in this government happened that Maliya Neerab Modi, Lalit Modi, all these people are sitting outside. Mevl Chowk, all these people are sitting outside. They are going to have different races and races. They are talking about the women's support. They are taking out the MLA rally. Women are getting almost every day incidents of different types of sexual violence. They were talking about the 15 lakhs of workers. The workers reached this level that our Prime Minister would say, sell your bangles at different times, they are workers, there is no data of workers. So, they don't want this debate to happen. We are talking about the minimum support price that you had promised about the farmers. What happened to that? That is why they will make some interesting stories. Sometimes they will talk about JNU, anti-national NRA, sometimes they will talk about Jinnah in AMU. And we have to trap people. We have to trap people in a scenario where they are dying daily. No one has to take the life of them. So, the questions raised on those questions, which the anti-people and this anti-national government has filled the nation and its people. So, now it's sort of conjuring up anti-nationals everywhere. Whoever opposes them is an anti-national. So, we know that now the action against you is that you've been rusticated from I think applying from next semester onwards. And you've been fined a huge amount. So, what is the future course of action? What are you looking at? I mean, what exactly do you think you can't submit your PhD dissertation? And if you do pay the fine, then, I mean, they're going to attack you left, right in center because what? You've played guilty. So, what do you think is going to, what are you going to do now? Look here, it's a matter of principle. We have not done anything wrong. We will not comply with any unjust punishment. And that is my answer. Because it's unjust, we will not comply with it. We will explore all legal possibilities. We will explore all political possibilities. We will fight this distance. Accepting this is to accept falsehood. It is to accept all the propaganda that has happened against GNU. All the propaganda that has happened against me personally from day one after 9th February. So, accepting this is out of question. And we'll fight this. I will submit my PhD, but not at the cost of accepting this falsehood. So, let's see in the coming days. We've already been vindicated twice in the court. I think it's almost comical. It's that GNU students, and I think I've been a university student at some point. So, we've been told that students, the job of a student is to study. The job of a student is not to be in politics and to not. And in a time like this when you're just a few days away from submitting your PhD dissertation and how when we spoke to Anirban and you've also said this multiple times that studies are informed by our politics and our politics at the same time you know why servers are informed by our studies. So, why is it that they've taken this action just days before you know you worked for five years and finally you know studying and you finally just days away from submitting your PhD. So, how does this look? But what am I saying on this? Sometimes I used to think that my PhD will stop. Then I thought that in the lynching cases the people who are accused in lynching support them when they leave the bail then they give them a government job. So, when people die on women these people support them then this is a very small thing according to them. So, I was shocked when my PhD stopped and I thought that my five years of hard work these people are putting a lot of work into it. So, I remember on February March 2016 our vice president Mr. Nidu said that studying and politics is not a job. If politics is done then we are doing politics. The vice chancellor chooses which government does the most. It is not politics. It is politics. It is not that the money is being cut but when the fees are increasing and people are protesting against it it is unaffordable. So, this is politics. The way Atul Jori came in front of them until it was happening it was not politics. When politics is our future it is important to do politics. We have to do politics based on the truth. When we do politics it is something else and studies are different. I remember when we came back from jail a journalist said how many days you were in jail. And after five years I have learned as much as I have learned in that PhD. I don't know whether I will submit or not. If I do it then it is good for the people. It will be in public domain. People can access it. That is the biggest validation someone can get from the people. Thank you Omar it was great talking to you. Thank you for