APU protest: Students question university response, point to shrinking space for open debate

Students at APU protest the university's response, citing shrinking space for open debate and academic discourse.

In the wake of a violent incident on the campus, where members of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) vandalised the property of Azim Premji University (APU), objecting to a discussion on Kashmir that was scheduled but did not take place, students of the University said they will intensify their protests against the university’s FIR against the student-run Spark Reading Circle at APU, affiliated with the All India Students Association. 

The FIR, based on a complaint by the university’s Registrar, became the centre of debate and unrest on campus, with students insisting that the FIR must be quashed.

Students, who wished to stay anonymous, told The Hindu that the administration defended the FIR by pointing to an earlier time when the university had asked who managed the social media page (Spark Reading Circle) for student events, and nobody had answered. The administration’s argument, they say, is that if the page was not run by the students, it should not be their responsibility, and the FIR should not be quashed. Students, however, argue that this ignores their concerns about being penalised for an event they organised.

Students, on the condition of anonymity, said that the administration has framed the decision of filing the FIR against the student run page as a “protective measure” taken in the interest of campus safety and to prevent further escalation. They allege that apart from a late-night email sent at 1 a.m. stating that classes would resume the next day, the administration has not provided any detailed written response to the concerns they raised in person, including discrepancies in the official timeline and questions about communication and venue decisions. 

Students further argue that the issue is not only legal but also reflects a “bigger change” in how things work on campus. Over the past few years, they feel that organising discussions has become more bureaucratic, with layers of approvals and rules that make even simple events complicated. Each new batch of students, they allege, faces stricter protocols that slowly become the norm, leaving less room for conversations on politically sensitive topics.

The social media post that led to the FIR had announced a discussion on a disputed historical event in Kashmir. Students argued that engaging with complex political and historical questions is integral to academic life and does not, in itself, amount to unlawful activity. They argue that invoking criminal law in response to such a post risks creating a chilling effect on campus discourse.