Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU)—one of India’s roughly 1,100 universities—yet perpetually at the center of controversy. Topping national university rankings on one hand, and notorious on the other for its allegedly “anti-national” ideology, JNU’s students, their beliefs, lifestyles, concepts of freedom, and their social, economic, political, and even gendered opinions are a source of both public fascination and ridicule on social media. In any society, the most visible public engagement comes through politics, and within politics, elections are paramount. When evaluating any social group or nation, the quality of its elections is a key indicator of that group’s social, political, and intellectual maturity.
JNU is an academic and social community of about eight thousand students, but often, any news originating from its campus is picked up by the country’s major media outlets before many of its own students even hear of it. In short, JNU commands a disproportionate share of national attention. Just last week, student elections were held there. In what is traditionally considered a stronghold of left-wing politics, the ABVP—an RSS-affiliated student organization—won one central council seat and 23 out of 42 department-level seats. Simply noting wins and losses, however, often falls short of capturing the uniqueness of JNU’s electoral process.
What Makes JNU Unique
Although student elections and associated clashes are commonplace elsewhere, JNU’s fiercely contested yet largely peaceful polls are noteworthy. Each year when the week of JNU Students’ Union elections begins, students take to the streets in spirited processions, carrying flags, beating drums, and chanting slogans. Vigorous campaigns are run for the four principal posts—President, Vice-President, General Secretary, Joint Secretary—as well as for department-level councilors, reflecting the nation’s broader political debates.
JNU’s student elections follow rules made entirely by the students themselves. The JNUSU has its own constitution, drafted not by the university administration but by the students. Under this constitution, students elect an Election Commission every time to oversee all stages of polling, from voting to counting. The administration plays no part in, nor directly supervises, the process. There is virtually zero use of money or inducements in JNU elections. In stark contrast, nearby Delhi University sees extensive financial influence in its polls, making JNU’s model stand out. JNU’s election framework is also shaped by the 2006 Lyngdoh Committee recommendations. That committee deemed JNU’s election model one of the best in the country, requiring few changes. As a result, the JNUSU structure remains relatively free from external controls and constraints. Over the past four decades, left-leaning student organizations have most often prevailed: the SFI (aligned with the CPI-M) has won the presidency 22 times, the AISA (aligned with CPI-ML Liberation) 11 times, while the ABVP has claimed the post only once.
Ideological Foundations
In recent years, the contest has taken on an ABVP-versus-everyone-else character. The right wing is routinely labelled “fascist” by opponents. According to newly elected JNU President Nitish Kumar, “If you call us immature politicians for refusing to deny ABVP’s existence, feel free to do so—but JNU is the gift of the past decades, and our fight against these forces is our own offering to it. The question is not left or right. But if anyone on campus resorts to violence, brings in thugs from outside, dictates what we should eat or whom we should speak to, it is our duty to stand up against such forces.” Kumar views JNU as a battleground of ideas, where every student must cultivate a tradition of questioning power. When asked whether the 1100+ votes won by Yari Nayam—a candidate unaffiliated with these ideologies—signalled a weakening of ideological politics, he admitted, “We fell short in understanding the issues of Northeast Indian students. We will reflect on our mistakes moving forward.” When asked about the excessive rhetoric of the left about Palestine, sidelining the Manipur issue, he highlighted the scale of unprecedented violence there. But it was difficult to get a clear idea about the excessive romanticism of the left regarding Palestine. Naim herself said, “JNU students are tired of left-right politics; they found a reassuring new face in us, which naturally grew our support.”
Inside ABVP
ABVP’s presidential candidate Shikha Swaraj finished second. She argues that JNU’s political narrative was set by the left, and ABVP merely offers a response: “If some of our campaigning seems aggressive, it is merely an amplification of tactics already in use.” Internal ABVP politics are intense. The “Prisoners’ Dilemma” concept applies here: when two inmates each fear the other will escape alone, they cooperate with the warden instead of each other, to their mutual detriment. Similarly, discontented ABVP members may work vigorously to pull down their own candidate in the fear that the winning candidate will get excessive perks from the Power, leaving them vulnerable. While left activists unite for shared goals, many ABVP members rally around material benefits under the saffron flag. A senior ABVP member confessed informally that today’s ABVP lacks clear goals, focusing instead on power. Many ABVP-aligned faculty admit that the many activists “talk only about violence” and fail to develop ideological forums. Yet JNU’s campus thrives on reasoned debate, and the right must foster innovative ideas beyond confrontation.
Rising Misogyny and Identity Politics
On growing anti-women sentiment in campus elections, Shikha points out that universities once guided national political discourse, but today that influence has become reciprocal. At the same time, she claims that she can go anywhere within the campus even at 2 am. There are some disrupting elements having misogynist tendencies, but overall, the campus has people with a liberal orientation. The surge in caste-based campaigning also marked the 2025 polls. Earlier, organizations like BAPSA and other progressive groups politicized caste as a symbol of injustice and struggle, but nowadays, it has been reduced to identity narratives around honour. High-caste mobilization has become commonplace. Even though SFI and AISA fought separate campaigns in this election, BAPSA faced the most internal fractures. Responding to this, Rahul Sonpimple noted that the politics of students from marginalized backgrounds tend to be emotional, and their primary goal is victory. Until BAPSA embraces this pragmatism, success on campus will remain scarce. Respect for dissent was once a hallmark of JNU, but Professor Ashish Agnihotri of the French Department believes that spirit is waning. An organization of free thinkers once existed on campus, but it is nowhere to be seen today. Notably, about 70% of students still call themselves “free thinkers,” yet President Nitish Kumar dismisses “free thinking” as a hollow catchphrase, observing that many self-styled free thinkers now align closely with those in power. He highlighted that S Jaishankar, Nirmala Sitharaman were free thinkers during their days. Sonpimple concurs with this, emphasizing that ideological engagement must remain the bedrock of campus politics.
JNU’s elections are a living testament to democratic ideals. As the great political theorist Hannah Arendt wrote, political action—that is, speech and participation in public life—is the highest expression of freedom; JNU’s intense debates and students’ active political lives exemplify this. Jacques Rancière maintained that politics begins when those outside the mainstream speak up for equality—JNU empowers precisely those voices. JNU is a system that fights power itself, designed by people and certainly imperfect, but one where who holds office matters less than the spirit of questioning. In an age when democratic life often seems degraded, JNU reminds us that true politics is a verdant garden of dissent, plurality, and collective creation. Preserving it is not just the university’s or the students’ responsibility, but that of the government and every citizen.
This article was originally published in Marathi for Loksatta on 11th May 2025