Reforming Governance Structures at the NLUs

The following extract appears at pp. 102-106 of a report titled 'Suggestions for Reforms at the National Law Universities set up through State Legislations' which was prepared by NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. It was submitted to the Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India earlier this year. It was based on surveys conducted among faculty members (33 respondents) and students (849 respondents) at 15 participating institutions in August-September 2016. I was one of the authors of this report. We welcome any feedback on its contents.

The full text can be downloaded here:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3171842.

Reforming Governance Structures

We now turn to some of the opinions gathered in respect of the governance structures at the NLUs. While this issue would be better examined through institution-specific case studies, we have tried to briefly recount some of the concerns that appear to be common to many of the institutions covered by our study. One thread touches on worries about the excessive centralization of decision-making authority in the hands of incumbent Vice-Chancellors. The Vice-Chancellor serves as both the academic and administrative head of a higher education institution. Owing to the relatively small size of the NLUs when compared with larger public Universities, there is bound to be more scrutiny exercised by a Vice-Chancellor in matters of day-to-day administration. It would be a logical consequence of this situation that faculty members, non-teaching staff and students would be interacting with the head of the institution more often than what is the case at larger public Universities. A high degree of familiarity between the respective stakeholders may enable more responsive decision-making in the short-run but can also generate distrust in the long-run.

A certain degree of control is expected in the performance of routine co-ordination functions such as authorizing construction of physical infrastructure and procurement of essential materials (such as books for the library and groceries for dining facilities). However, that should not preclude disclosures about administrative decision-making. The lack of publicly verifiable information about spending decisions creates undue apprehensions about graft and self-dealing behaviour. So the periodic disclosure of spending decisions is an effective means of preventing or allaying such apprehensions. As mentioned earlier in this Report, this can be easily done by uploading the annual financial statements of the institution on its official website after they have been independently audited and approved by the Governing Bodies.

In comparison, there is a much higher expectation of transparency and fairness in decision-making when it comes to academic matters such as recruitment of teachers, allocation of teaching responsibilities and the handling of grievances related to teaching and evaluation. At many of the institutions covered by our study, we heard testimonies detailing instances where incumbent Vice-Chancellors had used their discretion in a very expansive manner when it comes to academic matters. A very troubling set of instances reported at NLSIU Bangalore deals with interference in the evaluation of examinations by individual teachers. The existing procedures for re-evaluation were invoked to modify marks given by the Course Instructors, with no involvement of other faculty members or subject experts. Such interference might be couched as a remedial intervention in order to protect students who are struggling to cope with the coursework, but it seriously undermines the presumption of academic autonomy which has been touted as a distinctive feature of the NLUs. Not only does such interference seriously demotivate teachers, but it also distorts the incentives for students to work hard for completing their coursework. Respondents at several institutions criticized the lack of open deliberations on academic matters. Pointed references were made to the discontinuation of regular faculty meetings and the casual overturning of decisions made by internal committees constituted to administer the undergraduate and postgraduate programmes respectively. Some Vice-Chancellors are known to prefer dealing with grievances in an individualized manner rather than attempting to resolve problems through collective deliberation. Even in dealing with individual representations, there might be an intentional avoidance of difficult and inconvenient questions. Like in the case of public institutions at large, the concentration of powers in a few hands can severely compromise the elements of expertise, efficiency and predictability that are expected in decision-making.

Another set of respondents pointed out that many of the incumbent NLU Vice-Chancellors have been selected for these roles after acquiring their previous work experience in very different institutional settings. Hence some of them tend to be quite indifferent to problems such as teachers neglecting their professional responsibilities and students being visibly apathetic towards their coursework. At a few institutions, no concrete action has been taken despite classes for several subjects not being held regularly and reports of irregularities in the conduct of examinations. Such indifference may also extend to the domain of faculty recruitments if the head of the institution does not see the importance of attracting talented and motivated teachers. In many cases, candidates with impressive scholarly credentials have been overlooked in favour of mediocre teachers at the stage of recruitment and promotion. There were also personalized criticisms such as some Vice-Chancellors demonstrating a decidedly ‘feudal’ style of management where benefits such as fast-track promotions are handed out to teachers and employees who display loyalty. On the other hand, those who are openly critical of administrative decisions tend to have slower career advancement or may even face retaliatory action such as termination of services without assignment of reasons (if they are in temporary positions) and trumped up disciplinary proceedings if they happen to be in permanent positions.

While some of these criticisms might have been overstated, there is no doubt that the selection of the NLU Vice-Chancellors needs to be made in a broad-based manner. At present, the Search-cum-Selection Committees are constituted by the Chancellors and consist of nominees from the Judiciary, the Bar and Academia. The academic nominee tends to play an important role in these committees and is usually an incumbent at a comparable institution. They invite applications from eligible candidates (usually individuals who have served as a Professor of Law for at least ten years) and then shortlist them based on the demonstrated academic and administrative credentials. The shortlisted candidates are then called for interviews by the Chancellor before the final selection is made. This process needs to be conducted with more transparency and it would be better if stakeholders such as faculty members, the elected student body and the alumni association of the concerned institution are at least given an opportunity to provide feedback on the list of applicants before the processes of shortlisting and final selection are completed. This will improve the chances of selecting candidates who possess the desirable balance between scholarly credentials and administrative abilities.

When it comes to the functioning of the Governing Bodies of the NLUs such as the General Council (GC), Executive Council (EC) and Academic Council (AC), there were pointed questions about the role played by existing stakeholders such as the Judiciary, the Bar, and representatives from the respective State Governments. Most of the representatives are preoccupied with their professional responsibilities and tend to view their involvement in these bodies as a nominal function. The representation of permanent faculty members is largely dependent on the personal discretion of the incumbent Vice-Chancellors. It is quite possible that the external representatives may lack the time and the proximity needed to understand the immediate concerns of the primary stakeholders, namely the students enrolled in full-time programmes at these residential campuses. In such a scenario, there are good arguments to provide for the formal representation of the alumni associations in the Governing Bodies of the NLUs. Such an inclusion may become possible within ten years of the commencement of the taught programmes at a particular institution. Representatives chosen from the alumni are more likely to present an informed take on the day-to-day affairs of the University since they are familiar with its needs and also have a long-term interest in maintaining its reputation. They may be able to better understand and articulate issues concerning teaching standards and curriculum reform apart from facilitating support for student-initiated activities.

Apart from the formal governance structures, we should not overlook the role of elected student associations when it comes to day-to-day matters of campus life inside the NLUs. On this count, there is considerable disparity among the NLUs that have been set up so far. While some of them have student associations chosen through annual elections, there are a few where student representatives are nominated by the administration. Even among the institutions that do have elected student associations, there are different models in place. For instance, at NLSIU Bangalore and WBNUJS Kolkata, the student body directly elects two office bearers (President and Vice-President) while a number of activity based committees are constituted through selections made on the basis of previous experience in the concerned activity. In comparison, students at NALSAR Hyderabad chose all of their activity based committees through elections conducted at the level of each batch, whereas office-bearers or chosen through a mixture of direct elections (President and Vice-President) and indirect elections (Secretary, Joint Secretary and Treasurer). In stark contrast, NLU Jodhpur has a model where the office-bearers of the student association are nominated on the basis of academic performance. NLIU Bhopal did not have an elected student association so far, but plans are afoot to constitute one in wake of the recent protests on their campus.

There are different ways of looking at the role performed by student associations. Their foremost role is to act as a bridge between administrative officials, faculty members and the student community. Grievances related to teaching standards and the inadequate provision of facilities (for example dissatisfaction with library resources, quality of hostel accommodation and dining facilities) can be addressed in a participatory manner if there is a commitment to problem-solving through an open dialogue. It would be a mistake to view student associations themselves as a cause of discord. By establishing clear channels for students to raise their problems and work towards constructive solutions, the institution gains in the long-run. Apart from this representational role, student associations can enhance the quality of campus life by organising a range of co-curricular and recreational activities. For many law students, consistent involvement in co-curricular activities such as Moot Court Competitions, Competitive Debating and Simulations of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods provide a channel for deepening their academic learning as well as communication skills. The residential nature of these campuses also allows students to be involved with different forms of community-building activities such as informal discussion groups and hobby clubs among others. Similarly, the organisation of sports and cultural activities can also add value to the associational life of what are otherwise quite intensive academic environments. 

Suggested Readings:

1. Shamnad Basheer & Srovon Mukherjee, 'Regulating Indian Legal Education: Some Thoughts on Reform' [Available through Social Sciences Research Network (SSRN), January 2010].
2. Yogesh Pai & Prabhash Ranjan, 'Legal Education at Crossroads', The Hindu Business Line (May 15, 2013).  
3. Ruchira Goswami et. al., 'Conversation with Prof. Madhava Menon, Former Vice-Chancellor, NLSIU and WBNUJS', Journal of Indian Law and Society Blog (March 13, 2014).