Constitutionalizingthe Autonomyand Academic Freedomofthe Universitiesin Bangladesh

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/354960440
Constitutionalizing the Institutional Autonomy and Academic Freedom of the

Universities - Bangladesh Journal of Law, Vol 19(1) (June 2021) pp 33-58
Article · September 2021
CITATIONS READS
0 248
2 authors:
M Jashim Ali Chowdhury Sakhawat Sajjat Sejan

University of Hull Feni University Bangladesh
74 PUBLICATIONS 21 CITATIONS 23 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Parliament of Bangladesh as an Accountability and Accountable Institution View project
A Critical Legal Analysis of Environmental and Health Issues in Bangladeshi Ship Breaking Yards. View project
All content following this page was uploaded by M Jashim Ali Chowdhury on 07 May 2022.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

CONSTITUTIONALIZING THE INSTITUTIONAL AUTONOMY
AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM OF THE UNIVERSITIES
M. Jashim Ali Chowdhury*

Sakhawat Sajjat Sejan**
ABSTRACT
Autonomous universities and their academic freedom did not get expression recognition
in the Constitution of Bangladesh. While the Constitution broadly recognizes the
citizens’ freedom of thought, conscience, and speech and, also that of the Press, omission
of the universities needs careful reconsideration. Decline of the universities’ institutional
autonomy and impairment of their faculty members’ academic freedom have shaken the
morale of the university teachers and students in Bangladesh. This paper therefore
argues that a constitutional reading of the institutional autonomy and academic freedom
of the universities is a call of the time and it is possible. Building on the U.S. Supreme
Court’s interpretative recognition of the universities’ academic freedom and autonomy
under the cloak of its Free Speech jurisprudence, this paper argues that Bangladesh
Supreme Court’s fundamental rights and Basic Structure jurisprudences could offer a
similar protection to our demoralized academia. For the judiciary to do this, the legal
academics in Bangladesh may need to perceive the universities as vital “fourth branch”
constitutional institutions on the first place.
I. INTRODUCTION
Autonomous universities and their academic freedom did not get its due
recognition in Bangladesh’s constitutional discourse. While the Constitution has
expressly recognized the citizens’ freedom of thought, conscience, speech, and
press,1 freedom of the academia is not mentioned expressly. Bangladesh,
however, is not an exception in this regard. This is rather the case with majority
of the written constitutions around the world. Except in a few jurisdictions, some
of which are mentioned in Part 4 of this paper, courts and legal scholars would
defend the institutional autonomy of universities and academic freedom of their
faculty members under the cloak of freedom of speech, thought, conscience and
press. This indirect line of justification is, however, proving inadequate recently.
Rise of nationalist, populist, and authoritarian regimes across the Europe,
* M. Jashim Ali Chowdhury, PhD Candidate (Parliament Studies), King’s College London, UK,
is a faculty Member at the Department of Law, University of Chittagong.
** Sakhawat Sajjat Sejan, L.L.B. and LL.M. (University of Chittagong), is a lecturer, Department
of Law, Feni University.
1 Article 39, the Constitution of the Peoples’ Republic of Bangladesh.
34 19: 1 (2021) Bangladesh Journal of Law
America, Asia and elsewhere and their hostility to objective truths, dissenting
voices, and politically inconvenient research findings have jeopardized the
academic freedom and administrative autonomy of the universities.2 Likewise,
the contemporary developments in Bangladeshi universities are troublesome.
Declined autonomy of the universities, restricted academic freedom, shaken
morale of the university teachers, sheer politicization of the profession and
scandalization of the highest university offices e.g., the Vice-Chancellors, are
deeply frustrating.3
Given the context, this paper explores some plausible ways of recognizing
the academic freedom and institutional autonomy of the universities in
Bangladesh’s constitutional discourse. Part 2 of the paper sets out a general
linkage between the quality of democracy and the freedom of the academia. In
Part 3, we analyze Bangladesh’s 1973 and post-1973 laws relating to the public,
so-called “government”4 and private universities of Bangladesh. In this Part, we
try to explain how the public, government and private universities differ in their
structural design and philosophical foundations. A factually grounded analysis of
the university statutes in action reveals how their practical operation affects the
academic freedom and autonomy of the universities adversely.
Part 4 then explores the way the courts, particularly the U.S. Supreme Court,
have interpretatively recognized the institutional autonomy of the universities
and freedom of the academia as a constitutional principle. We rely on the U.S.
jurisprudence for two reasons. First, the depth and richness of the U.S.
precedents help us make a feasible argument for implied or interpretative
recognition of academic freedom within constitutional framework. Secondly, the
U.S. Constitution’s similarity with the Bangladesh Constitution in not expressly
recognizing the universities and their academic freedom makes the choice
sensible. Based on the U.S. judicial interpretation of academic freedom under the
umbrella of free speech right, we argue that there are several interpretative
avenues available in Bangladesh as well. We project the freedom of speech, right
to life and liberty jurisprudence of Bangladesh Supreme Court as potential
avenues of the proposed interpretative recognition. As part of the arguments, we
also rely on some doctrinal literature that emphasize the need for clearer
2 Ignatieff , M., “The role of universities in an era of authoritarianism”, University World News, April
13, 2018, available at <https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20180413
093717351> (Last visited on June 20, 2021).
3 Bay, B., “Universities can be saved only by unadulterated autonomy”: Interview with Professor
Emeritus Serajul Islam Choudhury, The Daily Star, October 05, 2019, available at
<https://www.thedailystar.net/opinion/interviews/news/universities-can-be-saved-only-
unadulterated-autonomy-1809370> (Last visited on June 20, 2021)
4 Choudhury, A.M., Governance of Universities in Bangladesh, The Daily Sun, April 13, 2017,
available at <https://www.daily-sun.com/arcprint/details/219200/Governance-of-Universities-
in-Bangladesh/2017-04-13> (Last visited on June 20, 2021).
Constitutionalizing the Institutional Autonomy and Academic 35
constitutional recognition of the academia within the framework of “Fourth

Branch”, “Fourth Estate” or “Integrity Institutions”. We suggest that express
judicial recognition of the universities within the Fourth Branch discourse could
invite a Basic Structure shield to the academic freedom and potentially offer a
judicially enforceable constitutional protection for the government-stricken
universities of Bangladesh. Part 5 concludes the paper.
II. LINKING THE DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM OF THE ACADEMIA
Democracy’s relationship with academic freedom is direct and mutually
reinforcing. Relation between the two is as old as the days of the Greek stoic
scholars who used to inspire their disciples to question the quality of governance
outside the ivy-coated walls of the governors’ palaces.5 Modern discourse of
academic freedom, however, took its shape in the premises of the fifteenth
century German universities.6 Philosopher Humboldt defended the liberty and
solitude of the universities so that they keep imparting new thoughts and ideals.7
German higher educational institutions drew scholars from across the world who
later carried the message to their respective homes.8 The American Association
of University Professors adopted its Principles of Academic Freedom in 1915.9
The idea comprised two key elements - freedom of the faculties, students and
researchers as well as the freedom of the institution from state intervention. 10
The academia exerted significant influence in America’s racial transformation.
During the Civil Rights Movement of 1960s, America’s segregated education
system got serious legal attention. Racial diversity and inclusion in higher
education institutions was a central battleground for racial equality and justice. 11
In the Europe, prior to the Renaissance, the universities were subordinate to the
Churches and were not allowed to disseminate radical or dissenting ideas that
could conflict the church.12 Post-renaissance emancipation of the universities
5 Bobzien, S., Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy, Clarendon Press, 2001.
6 Shils, E., “The Modern University and Liberal Democracy”, Minerva, 1989, pp. 425-428, at p.426.
7 Paulsen, F., The German Universities and University Study, New York. C. Scribner's sons, 1906, at p. 17-18.
8 Finkin, M.W., “On Institutional Academic Freedom”, 61 (1983) Texas Law Review, pp. 817-885,
at p. 821-824.
9 Hofstadter R., & Metzger, W.P., The Development of Academic Freedom in the United States, New York:
Columbia University Press, 1955, at p. 367
10 Metzger, W.P., “Profession and Constitution: Two Definitions of Academic Freedom in
America”, 66 (1988) Texas Law Review, pp. 1265-1322, at p. 1269-70.
11 Williamson-Lott, A. J., “The Battle over Power, Control, and Academic Freedom at Southern
Institutions of Higher Education, 1955–1965”, 2013, The Journal of Southern History, pp. 879-920
at p. 880.
12 Grendler, P. F., “The Universities of the Renaissance and Reformation”, 2004 Renaissance
Quarterly, pp. 1-42.
from the Church contributed to the Europe’s socio-political transformation and

its liberal democratic reorganization.13
Non-interference in the universities, their administrations, curricula, research
agenda, faculties, and students help the cause of democratic society by
encouraging contradictory societal discourses to co-exist and flourish.
Universities debate and nurture radical and emerging ideas. Without their
institutional autonomy and their faculties’ academic freedom, critical thinking is
impossible.14 Autonomous universities serve the governments as well. Academia’s
facts and science-based outputs are helpful for objective decision making by the
State. While the political convenience of a given regime might inform its policies
and actions, objective and apolitical data and knowledge make sure that decisions
that are ultimately taken are the right ones to take.15 Universities also keep the
supply chain of civil society, opinion leaders, political leaders, civil servants,
professional and intellectual elites intact. Injecting an ability of critical and
independent thinking among these future generation leaders is crucial to the
sustenance of democracy.16 It is therefore the interest of sustainable democracy
that calls for recognition of the universities’ institutional autonomy and also, the
academic freedom of their faculties, researchers, and students.
As Ginsburg and Huq argued in their celebrated theses on “how to lose and
save a constitutional democracy”, threats to liberal democratic order normally
start with a steady disappearance of a nation’s public sphere where policy debates
can occur and thrive on the basis of competing viewpoints.17 Would-be dictators
and illiberal populist regimes usually start their democratic deconstruction project
13 Gallagher, T., “Promoting the Civic and Democratic Role of Higher Education: The Next
Challenge for the EHEA?” in Curaj A., Deca, L., and Pricopie, R., (eds), European Higher Education
Area: The Impact of Past and Future Policies, Springer, 2018 at pp. 335-344; Bergan, S., and Deca, L.,
“Twenty Years of Bologna and a Decade of EHEA: What Is Next?”, in Curaj. A., Deca, L., and Pricopie,
R., (eds), European Higher Education Area: The Impact of Past and Future Policies”, Springer,
2018 at, pp. 295-320.
14 Blessinger, P., and De Wit, H., “Academic freedom is essential to democracy”, (April 2018)
Available at: https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20180404101811251,
(Last visited on August 11, 2020
15 Jackson, V.C., “Knowledge Institutions in Constitutional Democracies: Preliminary Reflections”,
7 (2021) The Canadian Journal of Comparative and Contemporary Law, pp. 156-221 at p. 188.
16 Dewey, J., Democracy and Education, New York, 1966, at 225–26; Bergan, S., and Harkay, I.,
Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and democracy, August 2019, Available at:
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20190827130223856. (Last visited
August 12, 2020; The Role of Higher Education in Democracy, Harvard Advanced Leadership
Initiative, Available at: https://advancedleadership.harvard.edu/blog/role-higher-education-
democracy, October 2020. (Last visited on August 12, 2020)
17 Ginsburg, T., and Huq, A.Z., How to Save a Constitutional Democracy, Chicago University Press, 2018,
at p. 231; Huq, A.Z, and Ginsburg, T., “How to Lose a Constitutional Democracy” 65(1) (2018)
University of California Los Angeles Law Review, pp. 78-169, at p. 168.
by vilifying the unfavourable scholars and glorifying the subservient scholars

willing to lend theoretical (miss) justification for their retrogressive agenda.18
Experiences from across India19, Turkey20, Hungary21, Poland22, Venezuela23,
United States24 etc., show that dictators, elected autocrats and illiberal regime
almost uniformly disdain the academia and try to clip its wings in every possible
way.25 To take a few examples, the eviction of the Central European University
from Hungary by its far-right Orban government was based on a flimsy allegation
that it was promoting homosexuality in Hungary.26 The U.S. President Donald
Trump’s disdain for Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the U.S. National Institute
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, not only costed millions of American lives,
18 Lazaros, L., “Constitutional Scholars as Constitutional Actors” 48(4) (2020) Federal Law Review,
pp. 483-496 at p. 484-486.
19 Sundar, N., “Academic Freedom and Indian Universities” 53(24) (2018) Economic and Political
Weekly, pp. 48-57; Johnson, J., “Narendra Modi’s Culture war Storms India’s Elite Universities”,
The Financial Times, Delhi, January 26, 2020, available at <https:// www.ft.com/content/
15723dce-3b81-11ea-b84f-a62c46f39bc2> (Last visited on June 12, 2021).
20 Public Statement, “Academic Freedom in Turkey: EUA Calls for Exoneration of Academics
Facing Prison”, European University Association,, March 28, 2019, available at
<https://eua.eu/news/288:academic-freedom-in-turkey-eua-calls-forexoneration-of-academics-
facing-prison.html> (Last visited on June 10, 2021).
21 Walker, S., “Dark Day for Freedom: Soros-Affiliated University Quits Hungary”, The Guardian,
London, December 04, 2018, available at <https://www.theguardian.com/ world/ 2018/
dec/03/dark-day-freedom-george-soros-affiliatedcentral-european-university-quits-hungary>
(Last visited on June 15, 2021).
22 Lakomiec, K., “Academic Freedom(s) in the Drift Towards Authoritarianism (4/4)—Poland”,
Droit & Societe, November 12, 2019, available at <https://ds.hypotheses.org/6391> (Last
visited on June 17, 2021).
23 Hocevar, M., G´omez, D., and Rivas, N., ‘Threats to Academic Freedom in Venezuela’ 3(1) (2017)
Interdisciplinary Political Studies, pp. 145-169.
24 Shattuck, J., Watson, A., and McDole, M., “Trump’s First Year: How Resilient Is Liberal
Democracy in the US?”, Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, 2018, available at <http:www.
carrcenter.hks.harvard.edu/files/cchr/files/trumpsfirstyeardiscussionpaper.pdf> (Last visited on
June 17, 2021),
25 Gall, L., “Hungary Renews its War on Academic Freedom”, Human Rights Watch, July 02, 2019,
available at: <https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/07/02/hungary-renews-its-war-academic-
freedom> (Last visited on June 14, 2021).
26 Enyedi, Z., “Democratic Backsliding and Academic Freedom in Hungary”, 16(4) (2018) Perspectives
on Politics, pp. 1067-74; Santora, M., “George Soros-Founded University Is Forced Out of Hungary”,
The New York Times, December 03, 2018, available online at <www.nytimes.com/
2018/12/03/world/europe/soros-hungary-centraleuropean-university.html> (Last visited on June
16, 2021); Petra, B., “A Strong Judgment in a Moot Case: Lex CEU before the CJEU”, November
20, 2020, available at <https://reconnect-europe.eu/blog/a-strong-judgment-in-a-moot-case-lex-
ceu-before-the-cjeu/> (Last visited on June 17, 2021); Inotai, E., “Legal victory for Central
European University is too little, too late”, Balkan Insights, October 06, 2020, available online at:
<https://balkaninsight.com/2020/10/06/legal-victory-for-central-european-university-is-too-little
-too-late/> (Last visited on June 17, 2021).
it severely injured the public morale of the American academia.27 Donald

Trump’s wholesale restriction on entry of foreign students in America was based
on a very shallow anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim populism and was considered
a direct impediment to the to the American universities’ capacity to attract the
world’s best and brightest scholars.28 Turkish President Erdogan’s regime have
allegedly targeted the universities and thousands of their faculties in the process
of clearing obstacles to his authoritarian hold over power.29 Indian Prime Minster
Narendra Modi’s BJP regime have directly targeted Jawaharlal Nehru University
and Jamia Milia Islamia of Delhi30 and also the intellectual critics standing in the
way of its religious bigotry.31 In Poland, a prominent constitutional scholar
Professor Wojciech Sadurski has been personally targeted by the regime for his
critical voice against the government32 and also, a group of law professors at
Cracow University were sued for criticising the government’s criminal law reform
proposals.33 Liora Lazarus, therefore, opines that initial assault on academic
27 CNN, “How right-wing media is trying to make Fauci Public Enemy No. 1”, available online at:
<https://edition.cnn.com/videos/media/2021/06/13/dr-anthony-fauci-right-wing-media-
stelter-pkg-rs-vpx.cnn> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
28 Hartocollis, A., and Jordan, M., “Harvard and M.I.T. Sue to Stop Trump Visa Rules for Foreign
Students”, The New York Times, July 8, 2020, available at <https://www.nytimes.com/
2020/07/08/us/harvard-mit-trump-ice-students.html> (Last visited on June 19, 2021); Perez Jr, J.,
“Trump Tweet Threatens Tax Exempt Status of Schools”, Politico, July 10, 2020, available at
<www.politico.com/news/2020/07/10/trump-threatens-schools-colleges-356294> (Last visited
on June 18, 2021).
29 Hansen, S. “‘The Era of People Like You is Over’: How Turkey Purged its Intellectuals”, The New
York Times Magazine, July 24, 2019, available online at <www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/
magazine/the-era-of-people-like-you-is-overhow-turkey-purged-its-intellectuals.html> (Last
visited on June 10, 2021); Public Statement, “Turkey: Government Targeting Academics”, Human
Rights Watch, May 14, 2018, available online at: <http//www.hrw.org/news/2018/05/14/turkey-
government-targeting-academics> (Last visited on June 16, 2021).
30 “Protect India’s Universities”, 577 (2020) International Journal of Science, at p. 293; Singh, S. R.,
“Delhi riots case: HC pulls up police for ‘casually’ invoking anti-terror law against students”, The
Hindu, June 15, 2021, available online at: <https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/
delhi-riots-cases-high-court-bail-to-narwal-kalita-tanha/article34818679.ece> (Last visited on
June 17, 2021).
31 Ganguly, S., “India Under Modi: Threats to Pluralism”, 30(1) (2019) Journal of Democracy, pp 83-90.
32 Scholars At Risk Network, “Academic Freedom Monitoring Project, University of Warsaw”
(Report), January 20, 2019, <www.scholarsatrisk.org/report/2019-01-20-university-of-
warsaw/>; Morijn, J., “Open Letter in Support of Professor Wojciech Sadurski” Verfassungsblog
Blog, May 06, 2019, available online at <https://verfassungsblog.de/open-letter-insupport-of-
professor-wojciech-sadurski> (Last visited on June 12, 2021); Sadurski,W., “I Criticized Poland’s
Government. Now it is Trying to Ruin Me”, The Washington Post, May 21, 2019, available online
at <www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/21/icriticized-polands-government-now-its-
trying-ruin-me/> (Last visited on June 15, 2021).
33 Grabowska-Moroz, B., Lokomiec, K. and Ziolkowski, M., “The History of the 48-Hour Lawsuit:
Democratic Backsliding, Academic Freedom, and the Legislative Process in Poland”, IACL-
AIDC Blog, June 28, 2019, available online at <https://blog-iacl-aidc.org/2019-
freedom starts with “hyper-politicisation of the academic space and polarisation

of academic opinion.”34 Given the direct contradiction of academic freedom with
authoritarianism, former Chairman of the Central European University, Michael
Ignatieff’ has labelled the freedom of the academy as a “counter-majoritarian
virtue”35 that could save the life of democracy. In the next Part of the discussion
we will address the problems facing the universities of Bangladesh.
III. LEGAL REGIME OF THE UNIVERSITIES IN BANGLADESH
The University of Dhaka started its journey as the first university of
Bangladesh in 1921. While the British colonial power’s higher education policies
were driven by its need for creating a class of citizens who would be “Indian in
blood and color, but English in taste”,36 opposition to the establishment of
University of Dhaka in Kolkata and support for it in Dhaka were based on a
completely different rationale. The intellectual elites in Kolkata opposed the
university on apprehension that it was an attempt to dislodge the focus of
Kolkata as a center of anti-colonial mobilization.37 The peoples of Bangladesh
(then the East Bengal), on the other hand, rejoiced it as a breeding ground of
future political awareness and development.38 During the Pakistani period, three
more universities - Rajshahi, Chittagong and Jahangirnagar - were established in
1953, 1966 and 1970 respectively. Two specialized universities namely, the
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) and Bangladesh
Agricultural University were also established in 1961 by separate statutes. The
universities of East Pakistan, particularly the University of Dhaka, became the
ground zero of all nationalist movements and political uprising against the
Pakistani regime.39 Students, faculties, and intellectuals hailing from the
posts/2019/6/27/the-history-of-the-48-hour-lawsuit-democraticbacksliding-academic-freedom-
and-the-legislative-process-in-poland> (Last visited on June 14, 2021).
34 supra note 18, at p. 487.
35 Ignatieff, M. “Academic Freedom and the Future of Europe” Working Paper No 40, Centre for
Global Higher Education, July 2018, at p. 6, available online at <https://www.researchcghe.org/
perch/resources/publications/wp40.pdf> (Last visited on June 15, 2021).
36 McLeod, J., Beginning Postcolonialism, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000, at p. 13.
37 Rahman, A., “Rabindranath and Dhaka University”, Dhaka Tribune, May 15, 2018, available online
at: <https://www.dhakatribune.com/magazine/arts-letters/2018/05/14/rabindranath-and-
dhaka-university> (Last visited on June 15, 2021); Mazid, M. A., “Missing links in the history of
Dhaka University” available at <https://www.thedailystar.net/news-detail-242879> (Last visited
on June 18, 2021).
38 Alam. F., “University of Dhaka and the partitioning of Bengal”, The Daily Star, August 25, 2017
available online at <https://www.thedailystar.net/star-weekend/dhaka-university-and-the-
partitioning-bengal-1453546> (Last visited on June 16, 2021).
39 Chandan, S. K., “A Campus Forever Linked to Liberation”, The Daily Star, March 26, 2018,
available online at <https://www.thedailystar.net/star-weekend/spotlight/campus-forever-
linked-liberation-1551910> (Last visited on June 13, 2021).
universities constituted the driving force in Bangladesh’s 1971 liberation war.40

Teachers and students of the universities faced the crudest of the wrath and
persecution of the Pakistani junta.
At independence in 1971, universities therefore claimed their rightful position
with the new body politic. The government responded affirmatively.41 The four
university statutes of 197342 accordingly reflected a remarkably liberal view of the
universities’ academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Dhaka, Rajshahi,
Chittagong and Jahangirnagar universities – popularly known as the Four Public
Universities - were granted autonomous status and the highest possible level of
academic freedom through the 1973 laws. The Pakistani Laws relating to BUET
and Agricultural University, however, were not changed in the newly independent
Bangladesh. As of 2021, there are now forty-nine public universities established
under separate laws for each of them. Since the establishment of North South
University as the first private university of Bangladesh in 1992, there are now 107
private universities approved by the UGC. All the private universities operate
under the terms and conditions of an umbrella law named the Private University
Act, 2010. All these statutory universities and other private universities are
supervised by the University Grants Commission (UGC) which was established
on December 16, 1972 and incorporated by a Presidential Order in 1973 as an
autonomous regulatory body in higher education sector.
The Four Public University Statues of 1973
The Acts and Orders of 1973 that regulate the four public universities show
a visible commitment to self-governance and autonomy of those. The Senate,
Syndicate, Academic Council, Faculties, Committees of Courses and Studies,
Boards of Advanced Studies, Finance Committee, Planning and Development
Committees and the Selection Boards taken together got a decisive control over
the activities of these universities.43
The 1973 law designated the President of Bangladesh, a constitutionally
titular Head of the State, as the Chancellor of the universities. As the Chancellor,
the President’s role is merely ceremonial. As per the 1973 laws, he would appoint
40 Quddus, M. & Rashid, S., “The Worldwide Movement in Private Universities: Revolutionary
Growth in post-secondary Higher Education”, 59(3) (2000) American Journal of Economics and
Sociology, pp. 487-516.
41 Husain, S. A., “Bangabandhu in Building Bangladesh” The Daily Sun, March 17, 2021, available
online at <https://www.daily-sun.com/arcprint/details/541741/Bangabandhu-in-Building-
Bangladesh/2021-03-17> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
42 The Dhaka University Order 1973, The Chittagong University Act 1973, The Jahangirnagar
University Act 1973 and The Rajshahi University Act 1973.
43 Section 21 of the Chittagong University Act, 1973; Section 19 of the Dhaka University Order,
1973; Section 18 of the Jahangirnagar University Act, 1973 and Section 19 of the Rajshahi
University Act 1973.
a Vice Chancellor any one from a three-person panel elected by the Senate. The
language used in the 1973 laws is of obligatory tune (The Chancellor “shall”
appoint) meaning that there is no other way except appointing a Vice-Chancellor
from the Senate determined Panel of the three persons.44
Syndicate reports to the Senate. Academic Council is also placed in a
strategical position in between the Senate and Syndicate. Senate being the
supreme body of the universities, any bill, report, proposal, ordinance
(executive and academic), and resolution of the Syndicate is passed by the
Senate.45 Though the political government is empowered to appoint some
people of its choice to the Senate including the members of parliaments, civil
servants and distinguished educationists, 46 the number of such government
appointees does not constitute the majority. While the presence of government
appointed persons in the Senate might have repercussions on the free speech
and opinion of the other Senate members, this alone may not be enough to
grossly politicize the body. Most of the decisions of the Syndicate are
conventionally passed by the Senate as a matter of routine.
Syndicate is the highest administrative and academic body of the university.
Syndicate consists of the Vice chancellor, Pro Vice Chancellor, two
representative of the Senate, one representative from Academic Council, six
university teachers elected by the teachers themselves and some designated
principals from affiliated colleges. Here again, the government’s power to
appoint members to the Syndicate is limited to three persons plus one civil
servant who do not constitute a majority within the Syndicate.47 The Academic
Council monitors and governs academic curriculum, examinations, research and
degrees of the university. It consists of the Vice Chancellor, Pro Vice Chancellor,
Deans of the Faculties, Librarian, five persons associated with research bodies,
Chairs of the departments, ten college principals, two Associate Professors, two
Assistant Professors and two Lecturers. Except the Chancellor appointing some
1973, Section 19 of the Jahangirnagar University Act, 1973 and Section 20 of the Rajshahi
Principles from affiliated colleges, there is no scope for the government to

appoint people from outside the academia.48
Flamboyant Disregard of the 1973 Laws
While the overall scheme of the 1973 statutes is clearly conducive of
institutional autonomy of the universities and academic freedom of their faculties
and students, successive political governments in the recent decades have
effectively put these laws in abeyance.49 They have done this in two ways. First,
by making the Senate almost non-existent and secondly, by monopolizing the
appointment of Vice-Chancellors.
Governments and the Vice-Chancellors directly appointed by them are
characteristically hostile to any duly formed and regularly functioning Senate.
Situations are created and maintained in a way where the formation of Senate
becomes impossible. Elections to different categories of Senate members (like
registered graduates, student representatives, etc.) are deliberately kept hanging.
In cases of Vice-Chancellor appointment in these four universities in the recent
decades, Senate almost never elected a panel of three nominees. Absent any panel
elected by the Senate, the political government unilaterally appoints any person
of its choice as the Vice Chancellor. To take an example, in 2017, the outgoing
Vice Chancellor of Dhaka University had called a meeting of the Senate to
nominate a Panel of three persons for the next Vice-Chancellor. Opponents of
the then Vice Chancellor believed, perhaps credibly, that the sitting Vice
Chancellor, who had never shown any interest in the operation of Senate earlier,
was trying to gain a second term in the office by keeping his own name on the
top of the list through a servile Senate. A brawl broke out between the rival
factions and ultimately the nomination was challenged in the Court by the
opponents. The Court stayed the nomination and the Chancellor soon appointed
a new Vice-Chancellor of the government’s choice literally outside the panel.50
This one single incident is a telling tale of how the mandatory language of the
1973 laws has been kept in abeyance and effectively bypassed by the governments
to monopolize its strict control over the four autonomous public universities.
49 Hasnat, R., “The Debate on VC Appointment: The Position of VC only Reserved for Faculty
Members”, BBC, October 02, 2020, available online at <https://www.bbc.com/bengali/news-
54379000.amp?fbclid=IwAR1bAoM-3FJYCFsX-EaMfRAL1mciO5dgcHHwlAKM-
muK2ap0xnjgPb4kItE> (Last visited on June 10, 2021).
50 Rashid, H. U., “VC appointments dictated by ‘political influence’: A VC should be appointed on
the basis of the highest level of competence, morals, integrity, publications and institutional
commitment”, The Independent, August 5, 2017, available online at <https://www.theindependent
bd.com/post/107772> (Last visited on June 5, 2021).
Crude politicization of the Vice-Chancellor’s office has extensively damaged

the accountability and autonomy structures devised in 1973 Acts. Vice-
Chancellor’s directly appointed by the political government feel no relation of
accountability to any other body within the university – be it the Senate, the
Syndicate or whatever. Almost all the Vice-Chancellors in Bangladesh’s recent
history have been controversial, corrupt, and highly looked down upon by the
public.51 Ignominious corruption of the highest administrative and academic
office of the universities have produced a chain-reaction in almost every aspects
of the universities’ academic life and institutional organogram. Politicization of
faculty recruitment, teachers’ associations, teachers’ groups, student bodies, and
officers’ associations, etc., has directly affected the quality of teaching-learning
and research in the universities.52 Current state of affairs in Bangladesh’s
university premises indicate that the student wings of the ruling parties 53, pro-
government teachers’ associations and groups and politicized administrations of
the universities combined are working towards complete submission of the
universities to the whims of political governments.
Capture of the so-called “Government” Universities
Though we have treated the four “public universities” under 1973 laws
separately, there is no official differences of terminology between the 1973 laws and
the later laws passed in relation to other universities. Starting with the Islamic
University Kushtia in 1980, Bangladesh so far has established forty-five more
51 Ahmed, A., “DU withdraws Anwarullah Chowdhury trust fund”, The Dhaka Tribune,
September 15, 2015, available online at <https://www.dhakatribune.com/uncategorized/
2015/09/15/du-withdraws-anwarullah-chowdhury-trust-fund> (Last visited on June 6, 2021);
“VC Kalimullah wants his graft probe stayed”, Dhaka Tribune, May 28, 2021, available online at
<https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2021/05/28/vc-kalimullah-wants-his-graft-
probe-stayed> (Last visited on June 8, 2021); “JU VC's corruption list released”, Dhaka Tribune,
December 10, 2019, avavalilable online at <https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/
corruption/2019/12/10/ju-vc-corruption-list-released> (Last visited on June 8, 2021); Himu, A.
A., “Immediate Past RU VC: He did what he fought all his life”, The Daily Star, May 09, 2021,
available online at <https://www.the dailystar.net/backpage/news/immediate-past-ru-vc-he-
became-what-he-fought-all-his-life-2090553> (Last visited on June 7, 2021); Salman, Md. S.,
“VCs being engaged in corruption!” The Daily Sun, May 18, 2021, available online at
<https://www.daily-sun.com/post/553217/VCs-being-engaged-in-corruption> (Last visited on
June 9, 2021); Mamun, A., “UGC probing irregularities, corruption of 14 public university VCs”,
Dhaka Tribune, October 10, 2019, available online at <https://www.dhakatribune.com/
bangladesh/dhaka/2019/10/10/ugc-probing-irregularities-corruption-of-14-public-university-
vcs> (Last visited on June 4, 2021).
52 Tithi, N., “Teacher Politics Plaguing our public universities”, The Daily Star, November 13, 2017,
available at <https://www.thedailystar.net/opinion/society/teacher-politics-plaguing-our-
public-universities-1490188> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
53 Shahjamal, M. M., “Student Politics and Quality of Education: An Exploratory Study on Dhaka
University”, LL.M. dissertation, University of Oslo, 2007, available online at <https://core.ac.
uk/download/pdf/30884456.pdf> (Last visited on June 3, 2021).
“public” universities. There are, however, visible structural and philosophical

difference between both the four 1973 “public” universities and the later universities
- which are popularly called “government” universities.54 Theses universities lack
the institutional autonomy granted to the original four in several ways.
First, unlike the 1973 laws, none of the subsequent universities laws
contained a provision of the Senate electing a Panel of three. Rather the
government, through the Chancellor, is given absolute power to appoint the
Vice-Chancellor of its choice. This trend started with the very first university
established after the original four. The Islamic University Act of 1980 clearly
provided that the Chancellor will appoint the Vice Chancellor for a duration of
four years upon such conditions and terms as the government imposes. 55 All of
the subsequent university laws till date, have maintained the Islamic university
formula and shunned down for good the 1973 system of appointment from
Senate elected panel.56 The satisfaction of the Chancellor in appointing the Vice-
Chancellor is undefined and unrestricted in these laws.
Secondly, most of the recent universities do not have any Senate at all, while
some have a compromised structure of the body. For example, the Sheikh Hasina
University Act 2018, Sylhet Medical University Act 2018, Bangamata Sheikh
Fajilatunnesa University Act 2017, Khulna Agricultural University Act 2015 and
Bangladesh Textile University Act 2010 do not accommodate any Senate within
the university structure. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Science and
Technology University Act 2001 rather introduced a body named Regent Board
with limited capabilities.
Thirdly, most of the post-2000 university laws mandated the government
capture of university Syndicates and other key administrative offices like that
of the Treasurer. In these laws, the government appointed members constitute
the majority in the Syndicate. Say for example, section 17 of the Barisal
University Act, 2006 provided that the government appointed Vice Chancellor,
two civil servants, two other government appointees from other institutions,
Divisional Commissioner of Barisal and two more Chancellor (i.e. the
President) appointed persons constitute the Syndicate. Against this majority,
only two Deans and two Professors nominated by the Academic Council are to
be the members of the Syndicate. The government also secured the office of
54 supra note 4.
55 Section 10 of the Islamic University Act 1980.
56 Section 12 of Shahjalal University of Science and Technology Act 1987: Section 10 of
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Science and Technology University Act, 2001; Section 11
of the Khulna University Act, 1990; Section 12 of the Open University Act 1992; Section 10 of
the BSMMU Act 1998; Section 10 Pabna University of Science and Technology Act 2001.
the Treasures through the Chancellor’s direct appointment.57 Treasurer is an ex

officio member of the Syndicate.
In terms of capturing the Syndicate, the Bangamata University Act of 2017 is
perhaps marks the climax of bureaucratic aggression into the university premises.
Section 18 of the Act provides that the university syndicate shall comprise of the
Vice Chancellor, Pro-Vice Chancellor, Treasurer (all government appointees),
one UGC nominated person, one Additional Secretary, one government
nominated science and technology institute representatives, three Chancellor
appointed educationist, one industries and business representative, one
government appointed Joint Secretary from Ministry of Education, another one
the Ministry of Finance, another Joint Secretary from the Ministry of Information
and Communication, another Joint Secretary from Ministry of Science and
Technology and yet another Joint Secretary from the ministry of Law and
Parliamentary Affairs. Against all the government’s people, there is one teacher
nominated by the Academic Council. Very recently the government appointed
an Additional Secretary from the Ministry of Finance as Treasurer of the
University.58 Though this has been condemned by the university teachers’
associations from all over the country, the government simply did not pay heed.59
Control of the Private Universities: From Sponsors via the Board of Trustees to
the Government
The Private University Act of 1992 vested direct appointment and
administration powers in the sponsors of particular universities. The Chancellor
would appoint key personnel including the Vice-Chancellor at the
recommendation of the sponsors. Sponsors would also have a direct say in the
day to day administration of the universities.60 The next law, the Private
University Act of 1998 marked a shift in the approach. It would rather entrust
the supervisory responsibility in a Board of Trustees, instead of one or several
sponsors in person. The Ministry of Education made inroads into the
57 Section 12 of the Barisal University Act 2006; Section 13 of the Bangamata Sheikh Fzilatunnesa
Mujib University of Science and Technology Act 2017.
58 Alamgir, M., “Ex-bureaucrat’s appointment at public university irks teachers”, The Daily Star, May
07, 2021, available at <https://www.thedailystar.net/backpage/news/ex-bureaucrats-
appointment-public-university-irks-teachers-2089793> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
59 Bhattacharjee, P., “The republic of BUREAUCRATS!” The Daily Star, June 14, 2021, available
online at <https://www.thedailystar.net/frontpage/news/the-republic-bureaucrats-2110361>
(Last visited on June 18, 2021). Hossain, I., “Bureaucracy in University” (Bangla), The Daily
Samakal, May 10, 2021, available online at <https://samakal.com/chaturango/article/
210561556> (Last visited on June 01, 2021).
60 Kabir, A. H., and Webb, S., “Governance of Private Universities in Bangladesh: The Myth of
Institutional Autonomy”, in Chowdhury, R., Sarkar, M., Mojumder, F., and Roshid, M.M. (eds.),
Engaging in educational research: Revisiting policy and practice in Bangladesh, Springer, 2018,
pp.279-297 at p. 284-289.
administration of universities to some extent.61 The Private University Act of

2010 built therefrom and attempted to make sure that government appointed
members like the educationists, and UGC and Ministry of Education
representatives in the university Syndicate.62
Entry of the private sector in higher education arena since the early 1990s
was popularly looked down upon and being continually suspected. Stricter
government control of the private universities therefore did not raise much
eyebrows among the intellectual elites. There is no denying that private
universities themselves are widely accused of providing low quality education,
charging unreasonably high tuition fees, grading the students unreasonably,
neglecting the establishment of permanent campuses and other infrastructural
facilities, etc.63
Though the Private University Act 2010 does not disregard the fact that
private universities are entities initiated by some private individuals, the
government saw those as entities supplying public good. A very strong
supervisory role of the UGC and government is apparent in the 2010 Act. From
establishment to continued operation, the private universities are in tight grip of
the UGC and the government. Universities defaulting the terms and conditions
of the 2010 Act are in constant risk of being “black-listed”, their approval being
not renewed, their campuses being declared illegal, or their student admission
process being halted.64
Problems however stated surfacing once the process started rolling out.
UGC and the government have allegedly been heavy handed in dealing with
many issues. 65 Political affiliation of the sponsors constitutes a very strong
influence in the way the allegations of irregularities are dealt with. 66 Given
the tight control of the government through the politicization of the university
61 ibid., at p. 285-287.
62 ibid.
63 Ahmed, I., Iqbal, I., and Abbasi, P. K., “Private Universities in Bangladesh: Possibilities and
Challenges’, March 2018, available online at <https://bangladesh.fes.de/fileadmin/user_
upload/pdf-files/15._Private_Universities__possibilities___challenges.pdf> (Last visited on
June 12, 2021); Ahmed, M., “Private universities face existential crisis”, January 24, 2021,
<https://en.prothomalo.com/youth/education/private-universities-face-existential-crisis>
64 Section 7(2) (temporary approval); Section 11(2) (renewal of permit), Section 9(7) (terms and
conditions of approval) and Section 10 (government’s subjective satisfaction in the approval) of
the Private University Act, 2010.
65 Dhaka Tribune Editorial, “Private universities are not the problem”, January 30, 2018,
available online at <https://www.dhakatribune.com/opinion/editorial/2018/ 01/30/
private-universities-not-problem> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
66 Masum, M., “Higher education in Bangladesh: Problems and policies”, 1(5) (2008) Journal of the
World Universities Forum, pp. 17-30.
Board of Trustees and the Syndicate, Academic Council and all other organs, the
private universities do completely submit to the temperament of the government
in power.67 Moreover, the government is yet to institute a self-regulatory
accreditation council for private universities. 68
In relation to the academic freedom of the private universities, section 6(10)
of the Private University Act 2010 is particularly relevant. It provides that if any
university is engaged in “subversive activities that may harm sovereignty and
safety of the country”, its license will be cancelled. The Act does not define what
amounts to subversion and what not. Compared to any the global standard of
academic freedom of teaching, learning and research, this sweeping restriction
on the private universities is well below the standard. 69
Capture of the University Grants Commission
Though the University Grants Commission of Bangladesh (UGC) was
perceived as the autonomous guardian of the freedom of academia, the 1973
Presidential Order did not translate the perception into reality. The organization’s
autonomy has been substantially compromised in the archaic law as well as in
practice. As per section 4 of the 1973 Order, the Chairman and other members
of the UGC are directly appointed by the government and largely on political
considerations. Apart from the Chairman, the Vice Chancellors and Deans from
different universities and also, the secretaries of the Education and Finance
ministries are chosen by the government.70 Funding for the UGC71 and its limited
mandates72 are allegedly subject to the superficial control of the government. The
UGC has received instructions from the Ministry of Education on their plans,
policies, and actions regarding the universities. Given the situation, the
Commission appears relegated from the guardianship of the universities to one
of mere administrative liaison between the universities and the Ministry of
Education. While it was supposed to be a voice of the universities towards the
67 Chowdhury, M. J.A., “The Private University Act, 2010: Would the barking dog bite?” The Daily
Star, Law and Our Rights, January 15, 2011, available online at <https://www.thedailystar.net/
law/2011/01/03/index.htm> (Last visited on May 31, 2021).
68 Andaleeb, S. S., “Revitalizing higher education in Bangladesh: Insights from alumni and policy
prescriptions” 16(4) (2003) Higher Education Policy, pp. 487–504.
69 Kabir, A. H., and Webb. S., “Governance of private universities in Bangladesh: The myth of
institutional autonomy”, in Chowdhury. R., Sarker. M., Mojumder. F., and Roshid M., (eds),
Engaging in Educational Research: Revisiting Policy and Practice in Bangladesh, Springer, 2018, pp. 279-
297.
70 Section 4 of the University Grants Commission Order 1973.
71 ibid, Section 8.
72 ibid, Section 5.
government, the institution in practice has become an instrument of control for

the government.73
Severely Impaired Academic Freedom of the University Teachers
Teachers may express extra mural, intra-mural, or core academic speeches in
course of their professional venture. Extra mural speeches are the speeches made
by the professors as mere citizens.74 Intra mural speeches are directly related to
their area of professional expertise.75 Core academic speeches, on the other hand,
are the discussions on a topic within the curriculum. While Academic freedom
naturally cover the core academic speech and intra-mural speeches, sometimes
there might be confusion about extra-mural speeches.76 While the concept of
autonomy and professional independence should permit the professors to express
themselves in all their capacities as ordinary citizens, subject experts and course
teachers,77 number of university teachers facing harsh treatment from the state and
even the university authorities are on the rise in Bangladesh. In the recent years,
teachers faced prosecution, arrests and remands for their extra-mural speech
critical of the government or its leadership.78 Some faced disciplinary procedure
for views critical of their respective university administrations and its leadership.79
Some even faced threat of retaliatory legal action from the government officials
for expressing their intra-mural research finding on public health issues.80 A
73 Shibly, A. H., “UGC is in fact a misnomer and having limitations on monitoring”, Textile Today,
available online at <https://www.textiletoday.com.bd/ugc-is-in-fact-a-misnomer-and-having-
limitations-on-monitoring/> (Last visited on June 05, 2021).
74 supra note 10 at p. 1266.
75 Hand, K., “Behind Professor Salaita’s Intramural Speech”, Academe Blog, September 28, 2015,
available online at <https://academeblog.org/2015/09/28/behind-professor-salaitas-
intramural-speech/> (Last visited on June 06, 2021).
76 Spurgeon, L. D., “A Transcendent Value: The Quest to Safeguard Academic Freedom”, 34 (2007)
Journal of College and University Law, pp. 111-168, at p. 113-116.
77 Nugent. B., and Flood, J., “Rescuing Academic Freedom for Garcetti vs Ceballos: An Evaluation of
Current Case Law and a Proposal for the Protection of Core Academic, Administrative, and
Advisory Speech”, 40 (2014) Journal of College and University Law, pp. 115-158.
78 Star Report, “Defamatory Remarks against PM: CU teacher Maidul put on three-day remand”,
The Daily Star, October 09, 2018, available at <https://www.thedailystar.net/city/chittagong-
university-teacher-maidul-islam-remanded-defamatory-remarks-against-pm-1644253> (Last
79 Star Online Report, “DU assistant professor urges authorities to allow him to take classes”, The
Daily Star, November 28, 2019, available online at <https://www.thedailystar.net/city/dhaka-
university-teacher-rushad-faridi-urges-allow-him-taking-classes-1832989> (Last visited on June
07, 2021); Star Staff Report, “46 teachers urge CU: Withdraw show-cause on Ar Raji”, The Daily
Star, April 17, 2019, available online at <https://www.thedailystar.net/city/news/withdraw-
show-cause-ar-raji-1730710> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
80 Mahmud, F., “Row erupts over antibiotics discovery in Bangladesh packaged milk”, Al Jazeera,
July 15, 2019, available online at <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/7/15/row-erupts-
over-antibiotics-discovery-in-bangladesh-packaged-milk> (Last visited on June 05, 2021); Star
professor even faced harassment for his core academic speech in the class room.81
The chilling effect of this have squeezed the spirit of research in Bangladesh and
suffocated the free flow of knowledge and observations.82 Beyond the university
laws, there are already an array of defamation, blasphemy, digital security, press
control and censorship laws that limit expression of thoughts by the professors in
their capacity as ordinary citizens.83
In the cases of private universities, the problem is rather elementary. The
faculty members there are largely seen as employees rather than scholars,
researchers, and teachers. Job security of the faculty members being very shaky,84
they have very little scope of forming and disseminating independent
professional opinion or research finding on public policies. Driven by their profit
seeking tendencies,85 private universities have traditionally neglected the
recruitment of full-time faculties and ignored the research aspect of university
life.86 Mostly run as teaching universities, freedom of research for the teachers of
private universities stand largely compromised.87
IV. PLACING THE FREEDOM OF THE UNIVERSITIES WITHIN
CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Out of the 194 constitutions surveyed by Professor Vicky Jackson, she found
at least 106 constitutions that included references either to academic freedom or
Online Report, “Detergent in Milk: ‘Submit report or face legal action: Fisheries and Live Stock
Ministry asks DU researchers”, The Daily Star, July 09, 2019, available online at
<https://www.thedailystar.net/country/detergent-in-milk-submit-report-or-face-legal-action-
1768906U> (Last visited on June 07, 2021).
81 Staff Report, “Student Pours Kerosene over Professor in Bangladesh after 'Sexually Explicit'
Remarks in Lectures”, News18, July 03, 2019, available online at <https://www.news18.com/
news/world/literature-professor-in-bangladesh-doused-in-kerosene-over-sexually-explicit-
remarks-in-lectures-2215937.html> (Last visited on June 15, 2021).
82 Alif, A., “Call to ensure academic freedom”, Dhaka Tribune, December 14, 2019, available online
at <https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/dhaka/2019/12/14/call-to-ensure-academic-
freedom> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
83 Amnesty International, “Bangladesh: Rising attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful
assembly must be urgently stopped”, August 11, 2020, available online at <https://www.
amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/08/rising-attacks-on-freedom-of-expression -and-peaceful-
assembly-in-bangladesh-must-be-stopped/> (Last visited on June 3, 2021).
84 supra note 63.
85 Kabir, A. H., “Neoliberal Policy in the Higher Education Sector in Bangladesh: autonomy of
public universities and the role of the state”, 8(6) (2010) Policy Futures in Education, pp. 619-631.
86 Islam, F., “Some Issues of Higher Education in Bangladesh: Analysis of Demand, Problems and
Trends”, 292 (2008) Prime University Journal.
87 Chowdhury, K. B. M., “Private University Teachers’ Pay and Quality Issues in Higher Education”,
The Daily Sun, May 16, 2020, available online at <https://www.daily-sun.com/post/ 482420/
Private-University-Teachers%E2%80%99-Pay-and-Quality-Issues-in-Higher-Education>(Last
to the institutional autonomy of universities or to the both.88 While a number of

constitutions specifically mention the individual faculties’ academic freedom
within the broader regime of freedom of speech, countries recognizing the
institutional autonomy of universities are limited.89 Very few constitutions
mention the both.90 Apart from these, most of the countries of the world including
Bangladesh omit any specific reference to the academic freedom or autonomy of
the universities. Those, however, accommodate a generic constitutional freedom
of speech, often coupled with a specific mention of the freedom of press. In this
Part of the paper, we argue that there are ways to implied, indirect, or interpretative
recognition of the universities and their freedoms. Depending on its strength,
independence and activism, judiciary of any such country might be willing to read
the speech freedom in an expansive way and recognise the academic freedom and
institutional autonomy of the universities within its constitutional rights regime.
The U.S. Supreme Court constitutes a glaring example of this. It has recognized
the ‘academic freedom’ within the ambit of the U.S. Constitution’s First
Amendment freedom of speech.91
Interpretative Recognition of Individual Academic Freedom in the U.S.
America has seen a huge number of constitutional cases on academic
freedom.92 The American Supreme Court has emphasized the universities’ role
as a “marketplace of ideas and innovations”.93 There has, however, been
occasional tension between the relative priority of the universities’ institutional
autonomy vis-à-vis the individual faculty members’ personal academic freedom. 94
In Keyishian v. Board of Regents95 some faculties, who refused to sign an oath of
loyalty and assurance of not previously belonging to any communist party, were
not renewed after the first year of their tenure. While the federal district court
prioritized the defendant university’s institutional freedom to choose whom it
88 supra note 15, at pp. 202-203.

89 supra note 15 (Vicy Jackson has enlisted Albania (Article 57 Section 7), Brazil (Article 207),
Croatia’s (Article 68), Finland (Section 123) and Armenia (Article 38(3))’s constitutions in the list).
90 Peru (Article 18) and German (Article 5) constitution acknowledge the both.
91 Van Alstyne, W. W., “Academic Freedom and the First Amendment in the Supreme Court of
the United States: An Unhurried Historical Review”, 53(3) (1990) Law and Contemporary Problems,
pp. 79-154.
92 American Association of University Professors, “Declaration of Principles on Academic
Freedom and Academic Tenure (1915)”, available online at <http://www.aaup.org/file/1915-
Declaration-of-Principles-o-nAcademic-Freedomand-Academic-Tenure.pdf> (Last visited on
June 12, 2021).
93 Keyishian vs The Board of Regents 385 (1967) U.S. 589, at p. 603.
94 Daughtrey Jr. W. H., “The Legal Nature of Academic Freedom in United States Colleges and
Universities”, 25(2) (1991) University of Richmond Law Review, pp. 233-271.
95 supra note 93.
appoints, the Supreme Court focused on the individual faculty members’

academic freedom. The Court found the university’s reservation of a particular
political ideology as curtailing the core academic speeches in classrooms. The
Court emphasized that, in the universities, the existence of differing political
ideologies should be encouraged rather than be suppressed.96 The Court held that
universities and the state may not interfere with the teachers’ individual academic
freedom under the cloak of its education policies. It warned that such interference
into the academic freedom of the faculties would validate rather than condemn the
New York’s infamous Feinberg law97 or the America’s post- WWII practice of
McCarthyism98. Both of those were used as state weapons to oppress the voice
and participation of communist scholars in American higher education sector.
In a relatively recent case Urofsky vs Gilmore99, however, the U.S. Federal Circuit
Court has allegedly over emphasized the universities’ institutional autonomy by
arguing that absent the universities’ control over its research agenda and priorities,
professors’ unrestricted individual academic freedom could make them a special
class of citizens. The Urofsky decision has been criticized for allowing a space of
interference into the faculties’ professorial venture.100 It has been argued that
academic freedom must be understood to accommodate both the university's
institutional autonomy and individual academic freedom of a professor.
Emphasizing too much on the institutional dimension of the concept could
jeopardize the teachers and students’ freedom of teaching, learning and research.101
Despite Urofsky’s tension between the institutional and individual aspects of
academic freedom, the U.S. Supreme Court has been vigilant in guarding the
faculty members’ individual academic freedom. In Wieman vs Updegraff, Justice
96 ibid, at para 19, 20.

97 Passed in the New York State Legislature in 1950s, the Feinberg law aimed at dismissing the
teachers who were or attached with communist organizations and supported the “violent
overthrow” of the government. See: “The Feinberg Law”, The Harvard Crimson, available online
at <https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1952/3/8/the-feinberg-law-ptheoretically-when-the/>
(Last visited on May 31, 2021).
98 McCarthyism is a political discourse of the U.S. during the 1950s. Named after Wisconsin’s
Conservative Senator Joseph McCarthy, the practice involved attempts to restrain one’s freedom
of speech in the name of stopping “subversion or treason” against the State. See: Georges Pufong,
M., “McCarthyism”, The First Amendment Encyclopedia, available online at <https://mtsu.edu/first-
amendment/article/1061/mccarthyism> (Last visited on May 31, 2021).
99 Urofsky vs Gilmore 216 F.3d 401 (4th Cir. 2000).
100 Lynch, R. G., “Pawns of the State or Priests of Democracy - Analyzing Professors' Academic Freedom
Rights within the State's Managerial Realm” 91(4) (2003) California Law Review, pp. 1061-1108.
101 Rabban, D. M., “A Functional Analysis of "Individual" and "Institutional" Academic Freedom
under the First Amendment”, 53(3) (1990) Law and Contemporary Problems; pp. 227-301, at p. 282-
283; ibid., at p. 1079-80.
Felix Frankfuter termed the teachers as the “priests of democracy”.102 In Pickering

vs Board of Education103 and Connick vs Myers104, the Court equated a professor’s
academic freedom with a citizen’s freedom of speech, thought and conscience.
This line of reasoning implies that academic freedom is considered as a special
concern of First Amendment rights in America. 105 Protection under the First
Amendment Free Speech clause is a significant matter.
American universities and their professors frequently come to controversy over
extra-mural speeches that allegedly shake the conventional ideas of the
community.106 Universities usually refrain from interfering into the extra-mural
speeches of their professors.107 It has been argued that the Garcetti vs Ceballos rule of
denying first amendment right to the public employees for speeches made in course
of their official duties should not apply to the university teachers.108 If the university
teachers are to be treated like other public employees then the phrase “pursuant to
official duties” will regulate what they are teaching in classrooms, what political views
they are preaching, what they are publishing in their fields of expertise or what they
are saying a private citizens on issues of public concern.109 Teachers’ liberty to
explore even wild and radical discoveries or ideas110 must be protected as long as it
doesn’t shockingly disturb the moral and ethical standards of the community.111
Recognition of the Universities as Fourth or Integrity Branch Institutions
As regards the institutional autonomy of the universities, the U.S. Supreme
court’s upheld at least five freedoms of the universities.112 In Sweezy vs New
102 Wieman vs Updegraff , 344 (1952) U.S. 183, 196

103 Pickering vs Board of Education, 391(1968) U.S. 563.
104 Connick vs Myers, 461(1983) U.S. 138, 146-52;
105 Sweezy vs New Hampshire, 354 (19 57) U.S. 234, 250.
106 Scholars at Risk, “Free to Think 2016”, October 31, 2106 (Report) available online at
<https://www.scholarsatrisk.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/ 11/Free_to_Think_2016.pdf>
107 Whittington, K. E., “Academic Freedom and the Scope of Protections for Extramural Speech,
Why controversial remarks by faculty must be protected”, American Association of University
Professors (Opinion), available online at: <https://www.aaup.org/article/academic-freedom-and-
scope-protections-extramural-speech#.YMkwHKhKjIU> (Last visited on June 12, 2021).
108 Garcetti vs Ceballos, 547 (2006) U.S. 410
109 supra note 77 at pp. 131-144; Byrne, J. P., “Academic Freedom: A "Special Concern of the First
Amendment"”, 99(2) (1989) The Yale Law Journal, pp. 251-340 at p. 254.
110 Cole, J. R., “Academic Freedom as an Indicator of a Liberal Democracy”, 14(6) (2017)
Globalizations, pp. 862-868; Heins, M., Priests of Our Democracy, New York University Press, 2013.
111 Buss, W. G., “Academic Freedom and Freedom of Speech: Communicating the Curriculum”, 2(2)
(1999) Journal of Gender Race and Justice, pp. 213-278; Byrne, J. P., supra note 109, at p. 339.
112 Byrne, J. P., “The Threat to Constitutional Academic Freedom”, 31 (2004) Journal of College and
University Law, pp. 719-742.
Hampshire113, Justice Frankfurter outlined four zones of discretion for the

universities where the state intervention would be unwelcome. Those were the
universities’ power “to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach,
what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study.”114
In Regents of the University of California vs Bakke,115 Justice Powell endorsed Justice
Frankfurter's four zones of discretion when he argued that universities could
legitimately look for racial diversity in its student body and the state may not interfere
in this legitimate pursuit of the universities.116 Justice Power later added a fifth zone
of discretion to the list. In Widmar vs Vincent117, held that universities are entitled to
“make academic judgments as to how best to allocate scarce resources.”118
Absent any textual recognition of the universities’ institutional autonomy in
the Constitution, American scholars have offered strong normative advocacy for
it. Various new variants of the Separation of Power doctrine emphasize the role
of “fourth estate”, “fourth branch” or “integrity branch” institutions in
constitutional design.119 Political scientists have been arguing since the late
twentieth century that proliferation of mass-media, civil societies, non-
governmental institutions and interest groups as “fourth branch” or “fourth
estate” of the State can contribute to transparency, accountability and democratic
governance.120 Considered within a constitutional framework, these “fourth
branch” institutions largely draw from the citizens’ freedom of speech, freedom
of association and freedom of press. Professor Bruce Ackerman’s celebrated
“New Separation of Power theory” 121 endorses a parliamentary form of
government supported and counter checked by a democracy branch (conducting
elections), a distributive branch (overseeing equitable distribution of public
finance),122 a regulatory branch (supervising the administrative machinery) 123 and
113 Sweezy vs New Hampshire, 354(1957) U.S. 234

114 ibid., at 263 (Frankfurter, J., concurring) (emphasis added). 1
115 Regents of the University of California vs Bakke, 438 (1978) U.S. 265
116 ibid.
117 Widmar vs Vincent, 454 (1981) U.S. 263.
118 ibid., at 276.
119 Teemmel. J., “Parliaments and future generations: The four-power-model”, in Birnbacher,
D., and Thorseth, M. (ed), The Politics of Sustainability, Philosophical Perspectives, Routledge,
2015, pp. 212-233.
120 Ranjan, P., and Kashyap, S., “Media as the Fourth Estate of Democracy”, SSRN, August 23, 2014, at
p. 2. available online at <http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2485908> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
121 Ackerman, B., “The New Separation of Powers”. 113(2) (2000) Harvard Law Review, pp 633-729
at p. 634.
122 ibid., at p. 721.
123 ibid., at p. 722.
lastly, various integrity branches (ensuring the legality, transparency and

accountability of the governance).124
Subsequent researches by Klug, Spigelman and Appleby suggest that
Ackerman’s “integrity branches” would potentially include the traditional “fourth
branch” institutions as well as autonomous universities and other knowledge
institutions. Though the “Fourth Branch” institutions are conventionally
identified with the print and electronic media, constitutional scholars now-a-days
show an interest to include within the definition the other “integrity branches”
of the state like Ombudsmen, Electoral Commissions, Auditor Generals, Interest
Groups, Civil Societies, Non-government Organisations, etc.125 Mark Tushnet
emphasized the academia’s ‘protective’ function in relation to democracy.126
Robert C. Post rather argued for direct recognition of the academia as a “fourth
estate” or “fourth branch” institution.127 Vicky Jackson also argued for
recognising the “Knowledge Institutions” within constitutional framework.128
Though her definition of “Knowledge Institutions” include various
governmental and non-government research institutions,129 her advocacy for
constitutional recognition of the knowledge institution could be best materialised
by acknowledging them as important fourth branch institutions.
Apparently, the arguments for explicit recognition of the universities in the
constitution are gaining momentum. The rationale behind this is underscored by
Vicky Jackson. Jackson argues that while “texts alone do not determine levels of
actual protection”130, explicit recognition might compel the governments at least
not to hinder, if not actively promote, the autonomy of the universities. Such
recognition could also enhance the rigour of judicial review of laws, policies and
124 ibid., at p. 694.

125 Klug, H., “Transformative Constitutions and the Role of Integrity Institutions in Tempering
Power”, 67(3) (2019) Buffalo Law Review, pp. 701-742; Spigelman, J. “The Integrity Branch of
Government” 78(11) (2004) Australian Law Journal 724; Appleby, G. “Horizontal Accountability:
The Rights-Protective Promise and Fragility of Executive Integrity Institutions” 23(2) (2017)
Australian Journal of Human Rights, pp. 168-187.
126 Tushnet, M. et al., Comparative Constitutional Law, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018, at ch. 5.
127 Post. R. C., Democracy, Expertise, and Academic Freedom: A First Amendment Jurisprudence for the Modern
State, Yale University Press, 2012, at p. 98-99.
128 supra note 15.
129 Jackson, V. “Knowledge Institutions in Constitutional Democracies: of Objectivity and
Decentralization”, Harvard Law Review Blog, August 29, 2019, available online at
<https://blog.harvardlawreview.org/knowledgeinstitutions-in-constitutional-democracies-of-
objectivity-and-decentralization/> (Last visited on June 15, 2021). Jackson, V., “Legal Scholarship
and Knowledge Institutions in Constitutional Democracy”, The Association of American Law Schools,
<https://www.aals.org/about/publications/newsletters/summer2019/legal-scholarship-and-
knowledge-institutions-in-constitutional-democracy/> (Last visited on June 15, 2021).
130 supra note 15, at p. 202.
actions that may directly impinge on the individual or institutional academic

freedom of the universities.131 As is seen in our discussion of the post 1973
university statures of Bangladesh, an enhanced level of judicial review appear a
dire necessity.
Avenues of Constitutional Recognition in Bangladesh
As mentioned earlier, the constitution of Bangladesh does not expressly
mention the institutional and academic freedom of universities within its
fundamental rights framework or institutional design. There is no Bangladeshi
judicial precedent directly dealing with academic freedom or autonomy of the
universities. Therefore, drawing upon the Frist Amendment approach of the U.S.
Supreme Court, it may be argued that there are several judicial and interpretative
avenues to recognize the institutional autonomy of the universities and the
academic freedom of the faculty members within the current constitutional set
up of Bangladesh.
First, within the list of fundamental rights in the constitution of Bangladesh,
there are several provisions which have implications for the freedom of the
academia. While the freedom of assembly (Article 37), association (Article 38),
religion (Article 41), and protection of home and correspondence (Article 43)
could be related to the nature of the work and profession of the university
teachers and students as citizens, their professional and research freedom is more
directly relatable to the freedom of thought, conscience and speech (article 39).
Though the Supreme Court of Bangladesh has taken restrictive views of the
citizens’ freedom of speech vis-à-vis the allegations of contempt of the court,132
its interpretation of the speech freedom is generally expansive. Jurisprudence of
Bangladesh Supreme Court shows that the court, aided by the express mention
of freedom of press in Article 39(2), has considered the print and electronic
media’s right to print, publish and circulate as a fundamental democratic
guarantee of free speech.133 Institutional autonomy and academic freedom of the
universities performing the same role on the discourse framing level, however,
has not been brought to or recognized by the court so far. It may be argued that
the constitutional framework and the jurisprudential trend of Bangladesh
Supreme Court do permit such an expansive reading of press and speech
freedom. To take an example, in NCTB & Bangladesh vs A M Shamsuddin134, the
131 ibid, at p. 219.
132 Saleem Ullah vs The State, 44 DLR (AD) 309; State vs Chief Editor Manabjamin, 57 (2005) DLR 359 and
Md Riazuddin Khan vs Mahmudur Rahman C/P No 5/2010. See: Chowdhury, M. J. A., “Contempt of
Court: In Search of a ‘Law’”, 17 (2012) The Chittagong University Journal of Law, pp. 24- 52.
133 Sk Fazlul Karim Selim vs Bangladesh, 1981 BLD 344; Md Hamidul Hoque Chowdhury vs Bangladesh, 34
DLR 190; ETV Ltd vs Chowdhury Mahmud Hasan, 55 DLR (AD) 26 (arguments of Barrister Syed
Ishtiaq Ahemd, at para 17).
134 NCTB & Bangladesh vs A M Shamsuddin, 1 MLR (AD) 213
court did accept the publishers’ right to publish books as a form of freedom of
speech and expression. From a broader perspective, the university teachers’ right
to research, publish and disseminate knowledge without pre-censorship by the
state should also covered within the freedom of speech.
Second, the Supreme Court’s recent trend of expansive reading of the right
to life and personal liberty (Article 32) offers a potential candidate for utilization.
Inspired by the Indian Supreme Court’s jurisprudence, Bangladesh Supreme
Court has expansively used the right to life to bestow legal protection to the
environment135, rivers and eco-systems136, health137, housing,138 profession and
livelihood139 of the people. Drawing on the Supreme Court’s current
jurisprudential trend, it may be argued that the interest of an autonomous higher
education system and independent academia could be considered an integral part
of the people’s right to life and personal liberty under Article 32 of the
constitution of Bangladesh. As Muhammad Mahbubur Rahman notes from
comparative South Asian perspective:
“[C]ontinuing innovative explanations concerning this fundamental right [……] have
injected a self-executory character into this invaluable fundamental right and therefore in
different cases and litigation various guidelines are being formulated, prohibitions are being
imposed and obligations are being bestowed even in the absence of any positive legislation
to those effects. ….. [F]undamental right to life is being more and more effectively used as
an instrument for achieving social purposes and during the days to come this trend will
hopefully contribute to the development of a more vibrant public sphere.”140
Thirdly, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh could interpret the “Knowledge
Institutions” and particularly the universities, as important “Fourth Branch”
“Fourth Estate” or “Integrity” institutions of democracy. While the print and
electronic media has got almost exclusive attention of Bangladesh’s judiciary and
academia as the most well-known fourth branch institution,141 universities and
135 Mr. M Saleem Ullah, Advocate and others vs Bangladesh and others, 23 BLD (HCD) (2003) 58; Rajdhani
Unmyan Kortripokkho(RAJUK) and another vs Mohshinul Islam and another, 53 (2001) DLR (AD) 79.
136 Human Rights and Peace for Bangladesh vs Bangladesh (2019) WP No 13989/2016.
137 Professor Nurul Islam vs Government of Bangladesh and others, 20 (2000) BLD (HCD) 377
138 Ain O Salish Kendra (ASK) and other vs Government of Bangladesh and others 19 (1999) BLD (HCD) 488;
Kalam and others vs Bangladesh and others 21(2001) BLD (HCD) 446.
139 Bangladesh Society for the Enforcement of Human Rights (BSEHR) and others vs Government of Bangladesh
and others 53 (2001) DLR 1.
140 Rahman., M. M., “Right to Life as a Fundamental Right in the Constitutional Framework of India,
Bangladesh and Pakistan: An Appraisal”, 17(1) (2006) The Dhaka University Studies, Part-F, pp 143-
178 at p. 178.
141 Luberda, R., “The Fourth Branch of the Government: Evaluating the Media's Role in Overseeing
the Independent Judiciary”, 22(2) (2008) Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy, pp. 507-
532 at p. 508.
other knowledge institutions also perform a very foundational information

supply and opinion building role. While the newspapers and televisions have a
mass level information and accountability value,142 the expert level contribution
and discourse building role of the knowledge institutions should not remain
grossly underappreciated. As shown in the previous Part of this paper, recent
constitutional scholarship has started doing this. It has been argued that
considering the evolving subject of speakers who perform press like function of
supplying information and building public opinion, the courts should recognize
the “press in action”143 rather than trying to define it in its literal sense.
Particularly in Bangladesh, the judicial recognition of universities as “fourth
branch” or democratic “integrity” institutions would carry a huge constitutional
significance. Judicial review jurisprudence of Bangladesh Supreme Court heavily
relies on the Basic Structure Doctrine.144 Starting from Anawar Hossain Chowdhury
vs Bangladesh145, the Surpemee Court has described independence of the judiciary,
separation of power, democratic governance, rule of law, accountability, limited
government, participatory governance, etc as unamendable and non-dilutable
Basic Structures of the constitution.146 The Court has allegedly expanded the
basic structure doctrine liberally in various constitutionality challenges to statute
laws and constitutional amendments.147 Recognition and appreciation of the
universities within the freedom of press, speech and fourth or integrity branch
framework would open up the avenues of potential challenge to the post-1973
142 Alam, M. A., “The Role of Media in Bangladesh” Masters Thesis, Department of political science,
University of Dhaka, available online at <https://www.academia.edu/26986709/THE_
ROLE_OF_MEDIA_IN_BANGLADESH> (Last visited on June 17, 2021); Mannan, A.,
“Fourth Branch of Democracy and Fifteen Editors”, BdNews24 Opinion, May 22, 2013, available
online at <https://opinion.bdnews24.com/bangla/archives/9831> (Last visited on June 17,
2021); Mannan, A., “Democratic Countries’ Fourth Structure is Independent Media”, The Daily
Kalerkantho, January 10, 2018, available at: <https://www.kalerkantho.com/print-edition/sub-
editorial/2018/01/10/587886> (Last visited on June 17, 2021); “For the sake of Country
Newspaper Industry needs be Protected” (Bangla), The Daily Samakal, August 20, 2020;
“Constructive Criticism is the Beauty of Democracy”, The Banglanews24, available online at:
<https://www.banglanews24.com/daily-chittagong/news/bd/832169.details> (Last visited on
June 17, 2021).
143 West, S. R., “Press Exceptionalism” 127:8 (2014) Harvard Law Review, pp 2434-2463 at p. 2443
144 Chowdhury, R., “The Doctrine of Basic Structure in Bangladesh: From ‘Calfpath’ to Matryoshka
Dolls”, 14(1&2) (2014) Bangladesh Journal of Law, pp. 43-88.
145 Anwar Hossain Chowdhury vs Bangladesh, 1989 BLD (Spl) 1
146 Haque, M E., “The Concept of 'Basic Structure': A Constitutional Perspective from Bangladesh”,
16(2) (2005) The Dhaka University Studies, Part-F, pp. 123-154.
147 Chowdhury, M. J. A., and Saha, N. K., “Amendment Power in Bangladesh: Arguments for Revival
of Constitutional Referendum”, 9 (2020) Indian Journal of Constitutional Law, pp. 38-61, at p. 48-53;
Malek, Md. A., “Vice and virtue of the Basic Structure Doctrine: a comparative analytic
reconsideration of the Indian sub-continent’s constitutional practices”, 43(1) (2017) Commonwealth
Law Bulletin, pp. 1-27.
laws discussed in Part 3 of this paper. As is shown in that part, most of post-
1973 university laws including the Private University Act of 2010 mark a clear
dereliction from the state’s original commitment to the institutional autonomy of
the universities and academic freedom of their faculties.
V. CONCLUSION
At present, Bangladesh stands at the bottom of the global chart of academic
freedom.148 As indicated in Part 3 of this paper, gross politicization and
corruption of the leadership and administration in Bangladeshi universities are
creating a great disincentive for the teachers and students to teach and learn, carry
out research, publish the results, and express extra-mural or intra-mural
opinions.149 Given the direct and mutually reinforcing relation between
democracy and the freedom of the academia, silencing of the universities and
scholars could amount to silencing the democracy itself. In the total milieu of
circumstances, it appears extremely important that constitutional scholars and
judges of Bangladesh take notice of the institutional decay of the universities and
withering academic freedom of their faculty members. Relying on the U.S.
Supreme Court’s freedom of speech jurisprudence and Bangladesh Supreme
Court’s jurisprudence of the freedom of speech and press, right to life and liberty,
and the Doctrine of Basic Structure, this paper attempted a constitutional reading
of the universities’ institutional autonomy and their professors’ academic
freedom. It is argued that academic freedom and administrative autonomy of the
universities are already ingrained within Bangladesh’s existing constitutional
design. If due consideration is given to the ingrained structure and philosophy of
the Constitution, most of Bangladesh’s post-1973 universities laws and
government interferences into the universities are of doubtful constitutionality.
It is high time that the legal academia and judges of Bangladesh start eying the
constitutionalization of the universities’ institutional autonomy and their
professors’ academic freedom.
148 Redden, E., “Ranking Academic Freedom Globally”, available at: <https://www.insidehighered.
com/news/2020/03/30/new-index-rates-countries-degree-freedom-scholars> (Last visited on
June 18, 2021).
149 Hassan, M., “Academic freedom under pressure in Bangladesh”, Chowdhury Center for Bangladesh
Studies, UC Berkeley, available online at: <https://chowdhurycenter.berkeley.edu/academic-
freedom-under-pressure-bangladesh> (Last visited on June 18, 2021).
View publication stats

Constitutionalizingthe Autonomyand Academic Freedomofthe Universitiesin Bangladesh

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Constitutionalizingthe Autonomyand Academic Freedomofthe Universitiesin Bangladesh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Constitutionalizing the Institutional Autonomy and Academic Freedom of the

Article · September 2021

M Jashim Ali Chowdhury Sakhawat Sajjat Sejan

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Parliament of Bangladesh as an Accountability and Accountable Institution View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

M. Jashim Ali Chowdhury*

constitutional recognition of the academia within the framework of “Fourth

from the Church contributed to the Europe’s socio-political transformation and

by vilifying the unfavourable scholars and glorifying the subservient scholars

it severely injured the public morale of the American academia.27 Donald

freedom starts with “hyper-politicisation of the academic space and polarisation

universities constituted the driving force in Bangladesh’s 1971 liberation war.40

Principles from affiliated colleges, there is no scope for the government to

Crude politicization of the Vice-Chancellor’s office has extensively damaged

“public” universities. There are, however, visible structural and philosophical

the Treasures through the Chancellor’s direct appointment.57 Treasurer is an ex

administration of universities to some extent.61 The Private University Act of

government, the institution in practice has become an instrument of control for

to the institutional autonomy of universities or to the both.88 While a number of

88 supra note 15, at pp. 202-203.

appoints, the Supreme Court focused on the individual faculty members’

96 ibid, at para 19, 20.

Felix Frankfuter termed the teachers as the “priests of democracy”.102 In Pickering

102 Wieman vs Updegraff , 344 (1952) U.S. 183, 196

Hampshire113, Justice Frankfurter outlined four zones of discretion for the

113 Sweezy vs New Hampshire, 354(1957) U.S. 234

lastly, various integrity branches (ensuring the legality, transparency and

124 ibid., at p. 694.

actions that may directly impinge on the individual or institutional academic

other knowledge institutions also perform a very foundational information

View publication stats

You might also like