India, Maharashtra, vijay kumbhar, News, Governance, RTI, Transparency, Civic Issues, Real Estate

New documents obtained under the RTI Act reveal that the sole purpose of all the agitations and hunger strike of students of FTII was to take total control over the institution and that they had no problem with Gajendra Chauhan and Shailesh Gupta. These were red herrings. The stalemate is now restricted to three names only.

Students Don't want to leave their heaven
Photo courtsey the scroll

After meeting the Minister of Information & Broadcasting and the Minister of State on 25 July 2015, the students wrote a letter to the Directors of FTII giving a solution to resolve the ongoing crisis. The students were apparently happy with the discussions at Delhi. Post-meeting, the students had intense deliberations and discussions with the larger student body. Then they sent a proposal to the Director who in turn forwarded it to the Ministry. The students mentioned that the proposal to resolve crisis was based on what they (students) understood from the various proposals put forward during discussions with the Ministers.

Lets us first see actually what student’s proposal was

l. Three out of the ﬁve contentious members of the proposed society (Anagha Ghaisas, Narendra Pathak and Rahul Solapurkar) would be replaced immediately by three new mutually agreeable members.

2. Three members who have resigned (Jahnu Baruah, Santosh Sivan and Pallavi Joshi) would be replaced by three new mutually agreeable members.

3. For the tenure of the current society, a Vice-Chairman would be elected from among the Society members. All the powers of the Chairman would be vested in this Vice-Chairman while Mr.Chauhan would function as the interim titular head.

4. Mr. Chauhan would not be a part of the revamped process of appointing the new Director at FTII a search committee could be formulated for the appointment of the director- they would be entrusted with identifying suitable candidates.

5. The main demand of the students is academic excellence; to achieve this. a "Mentor/Academic chair" would be created at FTII who would help steer the institution in all academic matters. This mentor would arrive at decisions in consultation with students, teachers and other bodies. By deﬁnition he/she would be an active member of the Academic and Governing council.

6. A time bound Committee with a clear mandate should be formed to look into the reasons of the current crisis and suggest new rules towards formation of all the future FTll Societies in a transparent manner.

7. A Study Group comprising eminent people and academicians will be formed to look into the academic, administrative, infrastructure and human resource issues of the institute and help in the transition to the Institute of National importance. Recommendations of previous Committees such as the Khosla committee and the Nair committee reports could be considered to avoid duplication.

However, the students still have apprehensions about the role of the appointed Chairman under these circumstances. A proactive mechanism devised to address these apprehensions would help strengthen your commitment to make FTII a truly world class Film Institute. We suggest that the post of the Vice- Chairman in the current Society; to be given the title of Co-Chairman. All the powers of the Chairman would be vested in this Co-Chairman and the appointed Chairman would function as the interim titular head.

FTII Students proposal

The modalities and the time frames within which these solutions would be arrived at will be very critical to expedite the process. Also, the different committees suggested should have a clear mandate and should be time bound with members representing the highest academic excellence. In light of the above, if we mutually agree to the proposals discussed and apprehensions raised, it would help us resolve the current crisis at the earliest.

What prompted students who were earlier adamant on dropping five members to suddenly agree to retain Gajendra Chauhan and Shailesh Gupta? What was it that made Chauhan and Gupta non-contentious almost overnight? The students had earlier insisted that none of these five has strong credentials to become members of this premier institution. They also alleged that these five were political appointments. If that be so, why didn’t they oppose Pranjal Saikia who was an office-bearer of the RSS-linked Sanskar Bharati. Their vociferous protestations have suddenly gone silent.

Whatever be the reasons, it now appears that their opposition has whittled down only to three

Photo courtsey Ravi Karandeekar

names i.e Anagha Ghaisas, Narendra Pathak and Rahul Solapurkar. Students want these three and other members who have resigned (Jahnu Barua , Santosh Sivan and Pallavi Joshi) to be replaced by new mutually agreeable members. Why do the students not want back the members who resigned to support them? And what is this new condition of “mutually agreed” members. Process of such appointments should be transparent but that doesn’t mean appointments by “Mutual understanding” with agitators. Will not all other such institutions ask for similar changes then? This will then become the proverbial tip of the ice berg for agitations in the future.

Earlier the students didn’t want Gajendra Chauhan and four others to be associated to a “premier Institute’ like FTII. Then how come suddenly only Gajendra Chauhan and Shailesh Gupta are acceptable and not the other three who are presently on the board? Are they to be sacked? And if so what is the charge-sheet against them?

The president or chairpersons of governing council of FTII are, in any case, ornamental posts only. They don’t have any special powers. That means these posts have been titular all along. Then why did the students oppose Gajendra Chauhan in the first place? Their earlier objection that Chauhan did not have any association with FTII in the past and ,nor could he be placed in the same league as some of his predecessors has suddenly vanished in thin air. Does the only being titular make him to be placed in that league?

Students’ another demand is, Vice-Chairman would be elected from among the Society members. All the powers of the Chairman would be vested in this Vice-Chairman. Presently, the Governing council elects the Vice Chairman. What difference it would achieve if society members elect the Vice Chairman is difficult to understand. Giving powers to the Vice Chairman or any other member is the prerogative of the Governing Council of FTII. The government has nothing to do with it and the students far from it.

Students don’t want Chauhan to be a part of the revamped process of appointing the new Director at FTII. A search committee could be formulated for the appointment of the director- they would be entrusted with identifying suitable candidates. FTII rule 37 (i) specifically says that the Director shall be appointed by the Governing Council with the prior approval of the Central Government on such terms and conditions as may be approved by the Central Government. It is up to the governing council whom to make part of such appointing process. It is another thing that till today governing council has made chairman a part of such process.

Their next demand is the creation of "Mentor/Academic chair" who would help steer the institution in all academic matters. Interesting part of this demand is they want this mentor to arrive at decisions in consultation with the students, teachers and other bodies.

In nut shell, the students want total control and say in the process of appointing, president, chairman, member, director and also administrative decisions. It seems that if government appoints members with mutual understanding with students then that is the only transparency as far as current process is concerned. Those who appoint have the powers to replace and re-appoint. So, when would the students study and learn the basics of films and television. In their spare time?

What difference does it make if Gajendra Chauhan associates with FTII as titular or regular? How is it not going to affect the prestige of the Institute? How out of 6 members (Pranjal saikia included) only 3 members are contentious and others not? Students now have to answer as to the extraneous considerations that have weighed on their minds while trying to stage an official coup and take over the prestigious institute, which will go further down hill until it crashes if these demands are accepted.

Thursday, September 17, 2015

FTII Students Strike, New Documents Raise Doubts on Students Intentions

Related Stories