When Convocation Invitations Become Political Statements: The CJI, Student Protests, and the Battle for Institutional Values
There’s something deeply symbolic about a convocation ceremony. It’s not just about handing out degrees; it’s a ritual that marks the transition from student to professional, a moment loaded with emotional and intellectual significance. So, when students at the National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR) in Hyderabad decided to oppose the invitation of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant as their convocation chief guest, it wasn’t just a bureaucratic squabble—it was a statement. A bold one.
The Spark: A Letter That Ignited a Debate
Over 450 students from the Batch of 2026 penned a letter to the university administration, urging them to reconsider the CJI’s invitation. What caught my attention wasn’t just the number of signatories but the why behind their objection. It wasn’t about the CJI’s position; it was about his recent conduct. Personally, I think this distinction is crucial. It’s not a rejection of the office but a critique of the individual’s actions—a nuanced stance that’s rare in today’s polarized discourse.
The students cited Justice Surya Kant’s handling of a hearing related to alleged police brutality during a protest in Delhi’s Jantar Mantar. His refusal to watch video evidence, claiming a lack of time, and his alleged comparison of Indian youth to cockroaches, struck a nerve. What makes this particularly fascinating is how the students framed their objection: not as a personal attack but as a clash of values. They argued that inviting the CJI would undermine the very principles of constitutional accountability and academic freedom that NALSAR claims to uphold.
The Broader Context: When Institutions Reflect Society’s Fault Lines
This isn’t an isolated incident. Just weeks earlier, the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in Mumbai postponed its convocation, reportedly due to fears of protests against the CJI’s visit. What many people don’t realize is that these events are part of a larger trend—a growing tension between institutions and the public figures they invite. It’s not just about who’s speaking; it’s about what their presence represents.
From my perspective, this raises a deeper question: Are institutions like universities becoming battlegrounds for ideological conflicts? And if so, who gets to decide whose values align with the institution’s mission? The students at NALSAR seem to believe that their voices should matter—and I agree. After all, a convocation is as much about the graduates as it is about the institution.
The CJI’s Role: A Symbol or a Lightning Rod?
Justice Surya Kant’s tenure has been marked by controversies that extend beyond the courtroom. His remarks about youth and his handling of cases involving protests have sparked widespread criticism. But here’s the thing: the CJI isn’t just a judge; he’s a symbol of India’s judiciary. When students oppose his invitation, they’re not just critiquing a person—they’re questioning the judiciary’s alignment with constitutional values.
One thing that immediately stands out is the students’ focus on consistency. They’re not asking for a perfect chief guest; they’re asking for someone whose actions reflect the values they’ve been taught to uphold. This isn’t just about one hearing or one remark; it’s about the cumulative effect of actions that seem dismissive of dissent and accountability.
The Implications: A New Era of Student Activism?
What this really suggests is a shift in how students perceive their role within institutions. They’re no longer passive recipients of education; they’re active participants in shaping the narrative. This isn’t just about a convocation; it’s about reclaiming agency in spaces that often sideline student voices.
If you take a step back and think about it, this kind of activism is both necessary and risky. Necessary because institutions need to be held accountable, and risky because it challenges established power structures. But here’s the irony: isn’t that what law schools are supposed to teach? To question, to critique, to demand better?
The Future: What Happens Next?
NALSAR hasn’t responded officially yet, but the conversation is far from over. Will they heed the students’ concerns? Or will they proceed with the invitation, risking further backlash? Either way, this incident has already sparked a national debate about the role of institutions in reflecting societal values.
A detail that I find especially interesting is how this connects to broader global trends. From the U.S. to India, students are increasingly vocal about who represents them and what values those representatives embody. It’s a reminder that the next generation isn’t just inheriting the world—they’re actively shaping it.
Final Thoughts: The Power of a Convocation
In the end, a convocation is more than a ceremony; it’s a statement about what an institution stands for. The students at NALSAR have made their stance clear: they want a chief guest who embodies the values they’ve spent years studying. Whether or not the administration listens, one thing is certain—this isn’t just about one event. It’s about the kind of society we want to build.
Personally, I think this is a moment for all of us to reflect. What do our institutions represent? And are we willing to challenge them when they fall short? The students at NALSAR have already answered that question. Now it’s up to the rest of us.
