The report of the five-member panel which was submitted on March 11 has pointed out lapses on part of the students as well as the administration. (File photo)
New Delhi: JNU's high-level enquiry committee probing the controversial Afzal Guru event, should have briefed the students about specific charges against them and also provide them evidences before issuing them show-cause notices, observed Justice (Retd) AP Shah, former Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court.
Justice Shah was addressing the gathering at a public hearing organised by JNU Teachers Association to reflect upon the investigation process of the university's high level committee enquiring into the controversial February 9 event.
"If the students had sought the full inquiry committee report, they have every right to cross examine the witness and evidence should have been recorded in front of them," he said.
"The charges were never briefed out to them in show-cause notices. It is not enough to quote the clauses but tell the accused their exact role. A copy of full report should have been given to students," Justice Shah said.
A panel including Justice Shah, Warisha Farasat, Delhi-based lawyer previously with the International Center for Transitional Justice, New York, and Centre for Equity Studies, Delhi and Mrinal Satish, Associate Professor at National Law University Delhi, pondered over the enquiry process and its findings.
The event was organised at the varsity's administration block which has been the venue of protest ever since JNU Students Union President Kanhaiya Kumar was arrested in connection with an event on campus against hanging of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru during which anti-national slogans were allegedly raised.
Asserting that the last few days have been extremely disturbing and volatile, Shah told JNU students that he was proud of them.
"An entire University was branded as anti-national. I feel the right of universities of academic freedom should not be taken away. I am proud of you. Gulzar talked about you and said that Vidroh (dissent) is not Rajdroh. If I do not agree with their idea of Hindutva, I have that right of dissent," he said.
The report of the five-member panel which was submitted on March 11 has pointed out lapses on part of the students as well as the administration.
Taking into account the role of outsiders in the controversial event, the university panel has found three students "guilty" of arousing communal, caste or regional feeling or creating disharmony on campus.
(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)