The goings-on in the girls’ hostel of Sree Keralavarma College, Thrissur were recently challenged through a petition filed by Anjitha K. Jose, an alumnus of the same college. Kerala HC, on February 20, 2019, while reviewing this petition, struck down two extremely regressive stipulations in women’s hostel rules which barred girl boarders from going out for first and second show movies and another that prevented members of the hostel from taking an active part in political meetings, processions or propaganda.
Student solidarity has experienced a new wave of optimism and popularity across campuses all over the country, be it while fighting sexual harassment at SRM, Bharti College and HNLU; fee hikes and unaffordability of higher education at IIT Bombay, TISS and BITS Pilani or sexist hostel norms at HNLU, Punjabi University, Delhi University and others. The protests at Thrissur are of the same ranks – robust, unyielding and motivated.
Every day, right after the last lecture got over, all female hostellers would rush to their hostel rooms. All they cared about was getting to their rooms before 4:30 p.m. or the wardens would start calling their parents and force them to write a series of apology letters.
Salmath KS, a third year BA Political Science student, while elucidating on the state of affairs that antagonised the hostellers said, “we were allowed to go out only on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays and had to be back by 6:30 p.m. Then, too, we had to state in writing where we were going. If you’re late and if you’re a person who’s vocal about the college and critical of its policies, your parents are called and made-up stories about you are told to them. After 4:30 p.m., the usual curfew hour, you can’t even go to the library, which is on the same campus. The library, by the way, closes at 3:45 p.m.”
Women’s hostels locate their role as repositories and preservers. One may even argue that an early curfew for girls might be protective caution, representative of parental fears, or good old traditionalism. It is precisely within this dialectic that the High Court verdict can be best understood. It is not protective caution that hostels exercise when the woman stands cordoned off from the world. It is actually, as the verdict said, moral paternalism – a term which is used when paternalism is justified to promote the moral well being of people even if their welfare wouldn’t improve.
The HC, in its judgement, noted that “it appears that moral choice of the management is attempted to be imposed upon the Boarders. The moral paternalism is something to be frowned upon.” The count of parental fears dictating college rules and procedures has been used by the college administration as vindication for its regression. This was manifested in the two stipulations that the court had left up to the Principal to resolve, one challenging the 6:30 p.m. curfew timings and the other banning students from staying in the hostel during college hours. However, the High Court had an important assertion to make, saying, “the petitioner was an adult and her right to question cannot be compromised based on parental consent.”
Despite this and the court’s appeal to the administration to accommodate students’ opinions while decision-making, the management refused to rework in-timings with the students and held that it would only reconsider after meeting with the parents (PTA). A three-day strike by the hostellers from March 21 resulted in a meeting between the principal Dr Krishnakumari and the students and the in-time was extended to 8:30 p.m., as per the students’ demands.
On the last count, it may be said, quite simply, that this is not traditionalism but sexism disguised as such. The High Court in its ruling said, “a girl must enjoy freedom equal to that of a boy.” To put it more abstractly, this unwillingness to change, negotiate or accommodate is apparent in the subsequent course of events. Disregarding the earlier decision, Kerala Varma College issued a circular altering the students’ in-time to the women’s hostel to 7:00 p.m., which was decided at a PTA meeting where no student representative was present.
It was also reported that the warden and the principal made up stories to support their claims and defame the students who were leading the protest and filed a petition in the High Court. The students have decided to either hold a celebration or a protest on Monday, March 25, when new hostel in-timings were formally announced, depending on whether the timings are in their favour or not.
However, with the HC’s ruling on the matter of indulging in political activity on campus, an unambiguous win has been secured. The court said, “it is the fundamental right of every citizen to have its own political views as part of the freedom of expression. That can only be reasonably restricted for securing any objectives of the management of the hostel. Since it has no relation with the power conferred with the management, we find this instruction has to be struck down as violative of fundamental rights.”
Such an assertion, carrying legal strength and immediacy by virtue of its fundamentality, has a tremendous bearing on the fight for equality as well as freedom of expression. The Kerala HC has initiated a negotiation in the right direction, while the ideal remains an aspiration and a slogan.