Implementation is half-hearted

IN 2006, the Supreme Court constituted a committee led by R.K. Raghavan, former Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation, to suggest measures to curb ragging. Submitting its report on May 7, 2007, the committee said that it might not have fully understood all aspects of the menace but its 50 recommendations could have a reasonable potential to change the situation. The report, on the basis of which the Supreme Court distilled on May 16, 2007, nine specific guidelines to be followed, has not been taken seriously by any of the stakeholders. In this email interview to Frontline, Raghavan reflects on the reasons for this indifference.

In your report, you underlined the absence of a statutory provision, followed by appropriate delegated legislation, to prevent ragging as being responsible for the continuance of the problem.

I stand by this position. Stiff and well-conceived legislation may not put an end to ragging but will take us towards it.

You also blamed the absence of civil society initiatives. What can be done to create such initiatives?

Incidents such as that of [Aman] Kachroo should receive greater attention from the media, especially those in our languages and not merely in English. Parent-teacher associations should bring in initiatives aimed at educating student and teacher communities to evince greater interest in preventing rather than reacting to tragedies.

You made 50 recommendations. How many of these have been accepted and acted upon?

You will have to ask the regulatory bodies as also the HRD [Human Resource Development] Ministry to arrive at an estimate. Implementation has been half-hearted, smacking of tokenism.

The Supreme Court order carried nine specific guidelines. Do they reflect your recommendations? Do they have the force of law? Will it be an effective deterrent?

Yes, the Supreme Court directives are mostly based on my committees recommendations. The fact that they are guidelines indicate that they do not have the same sanctity as legislation passed by Parliament or the State Assemblies. But, when guidelines are issued by the apex court, they assume the colour of law and their violation does attract contempt.

Guidelines are not a panacea. But they can bring about a vast change for the better.

How relevant is the filing of first information reports by the victims and institutions? What if the victims prefer to seek extra-legal remedies in view of threats from perpetrators?

For this not to happen, we need a more sensitive police. This can come about only through training and media pressure.

Are parents guilty of ignoring victims complaints? How widespread was the parents indifference among the cases you studied?

I do not agree that parents ignore their wards complaints. At best, they underestimate the danger to them. Cases like Kachroos are a wake-up call to them.

Can a piece of all-India legislation to prevent and punish ragging help?

It is difficult to predict. But all-India legislation will be taken more seriously by all concerned.

Can a help-line be an effective answer?

Yes, certainly. It will depend on who runs it and what resources back the organisation that operates it. An NGO with a good track record can be persuaded to run it at least in important towns. The police will again have to cooperate with such a venture.

What are the prime reasons for the recent incidents?

Apathy and negligence on the part of the college managements and an utter lack of fear or respect for law on the part of the students, who copy our politicians, the majority of whom have shown a disdain for the rule of law.

How do you think the problem of collecting evidence in prosecuting offences of ragging can be addressed?

Through appointing full-time mentors on campuses and wardens in hostels and making them accountable to whatever happens by way of harassment of students.

They will be drawn from the faculty and the burden to establish how an incident of ragging happened will be on them. Such an arrangement will aid the preliminary investigation and thereafter make reliable evidence available for the authorities to act.