Tribhuvan University Faces Disruption as Student Union Escalates Protest
Kathmandu, Nepal – A significant disruption has gripped Tribhuvan University (TU), Nepal’s oldest and largest academic institution, as the student wing of the Nepali Communist Party has intensified its protest. Following an initial padlock of key administrative offices at the beginning of January, the All Nepal National Independent Union (Revolutionary) has now escalated its actions by barring top university officials from entering the campus premises.
The student union initially padlocked several offices on January 1st, citing the university administration’s alleged failure to implement past agreements. A primary point of contention is the union’s demand for a reduction in fees for specific self-sustaining departments: International Relations and Diplomacy, Gender Studies, Social Work, and Conflict, Peace and Development Studies. These departments, established to operate independently, currently have fee structures significantly higher than other university programs.
The consequences of the initial office padlocks have already been substantial. Vice-Chancellor Deepak Aryal, Rector Khadga KC, and Registrar Kedar Rijal have been unable to access their official offices, forcing them to conduct their daily duties from alternative locations within various deans’ offices and departments. This situation has already impeded their operational efficiency. The latest escalation, preventing them from entering the university premises altogether since Friday, is expected to further hamper their performance and the university’s overall functioning.
Dinesh Ayer, the leader of the student union at the university’s central campus in Kritipur, stated that barring officials from entering the premises was a necessary step to exert further pressure, as the initial office padlocks had not yielded sufficient results. He expressed a desire to find a resolution through dialogue, noting, “We are eagerly waiting to find a way out through dialogue.”
The university administration has repeatedly expressed its readiness for dialogue, but it insists that the removal of the padlocks is a prerequisite for any discussions. In a formal statement, the rector’s office urged the protesting students to “seek solutions through lawful means of dialogue and discussion.” The statement also implored current students, well-wishers, and all stakeholders to refrain from any actions that could disrupt the university’s core responsibility of delivering quality higher education.
A stark warning was issued regarding the potential impact on the academic calendar. The university authorities cautioned that the ongoing disruption could make it impossible to adhere to the scheduled academic timeline. The statement elaborated on the detrimental effects of such actions: “Padlocking, strikes, arson, vandalism and similar actions carried out within academic and scholarly institutions seriously affect the implementation of the academic calendar. If students are unable to obtain their degrees within the designated academic session (year), it will also cost them more time and money.”
The university administration further contends that the current padlocking activities contravene a Supreme Court order. The apex court, in response to a series of disruptive padlocks, had previously issued a prohibition on activities that impede the varsity’s academic and administrative operations.
This legal intervention stemmed from a writ petition filed in June of the previous year by Advocate Mahesh Bhattarai. The petition named several entities as respondents, including the Ministry of Home Affairs, Police Headquarters, the District Administration Office Kathmandu, Kirtipur Police Circle, and the offices of the Vice-Chancellor and Registrar. At that time, padlocks had been imposed by various groups, including the Part-time Teachers’ Association, the All Nepal National Independent Students’ Union (Revolutionary), and the Nepal Students’ Union, affecting multiple key administrative offices. The Supreme Court subsequently issued an order directing the removal of any existing locks and prohibiting future padlocking. Following this order, the CPN (Maoist Centre)-affiliated student wing had temporarily withdrawn its protest.
When questioned about their actions in defiance of the court order, Ayer defended the union’s stance, asserting they were fighting against injustice. He highlighted that the university had agreed to reduce fees following a month-long hunger strike the previous year, but this agreement was never implemented, causing hardship for financially disadvantaged students. Another significant demand put forth by the student union is the holding of a new entrance examination to provide a second chance for students.
Conversely, the university administration maintains that the academic calendar is already in motion, with classes having commenced as per the approved schedule. They argue that there is no provision for revising the fee structure at this stage. The varsity authority stated, “As all the activities have been carried out in accordance with the academic calendar already approved by the university’s highest academic body, the Academic Council, there is no provision for re-admission examinations at any level.” The standoff between the student union and the university administration continues, raising concerns about the future of academic operations and student welfare at Tribhuvan University.
