In a recent directive, the Calcutta high court ordered the Department of Higher Education in West Bengal to shut down union rooms in colleges and universities where no elections have been held for years. This measure comes after a horrific rape case at a law college in South Kolkata exposed the deep-rooted political rot within campuses. This disturbing case was not an exception, but rather the culmination of a long-standing system of impunity backed by political networks and institutional decay.

The court’s decision to close union rooms is important as a corrective step. But this move, while symbolically significant, risks becoming a superficial remedy unless it addresses the embedded political patronage and organisational networks that permeate campuses.

Union rooms are not the problem

Assuming union rooms as the epicentre of political capture would be a misreading of how power actually operates in college campuses today. Union rooms, while often serving as hubs of visible activity, are only the outward expressions of a much more diffused system of influence.

Political parties – especially in West Bengal – function through a dense web of student leaders, affiliated alumni, administrative contacts and local-level party workers. These networks are mobilised not just during elections, but in everyday affairs like hostel allotments, faculty freedom, cultural programs and even campus violence. Closing a room does not dismantle this machinery; it merely pushes it underground.

Party-affiliated student leaders will continue to operate physically inside the campus and virtually via WhatsApp groups in addition to local clubs and even tea shops near colleges. In anthropological terms, the political influence on campuses is dispersed and situated – embedded within the daily lives and material arrangements of college life. 

Institutions are more than brick and mortar

To grasp the persistence of political control despite administrative actions, we must turn to institutional theory. Organisations – including educational institutions – do not function in a vacuum; they are embedded in what organisational theorists call institutional environments that shape behaviour, expectations and legitimacy.

In his landmark work, Institutions and Organizations, W. Richard Scott outlines three pillars that sustain institutions: regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive elements. The regulative aspect refers to laws, policies, and coercive mechanisms – in this case the high court’s directive. The normative pillar speaks to the values and expectations that define what is considered ‘appropriate’ behaviour in a setting. And the cultural-cognitive pillar deals with the shared understandings and mental models people bring into institutions.

Student unions and their party affiliations are sustained not just through coercion (regulative), but through shared values (normative) and deeply entrenched cultural meanings (cultural-cognitive). For instance, in many West Bengal colleges, becoming a student leader is still seen as a legitimate path to political or professional advancement. It’s part of the ‘script’ of youth in a politicized society.

Thus, even in the absence of formal elections or physical spaces, the institution of student politics continues to function. In my own brief reflection on social institutions, I observed that institutions “regulate our conduct through both formal structures and informal norms.” What we are seeing now is a shift in the formal structure – closure of union rooms – without any meaningful disturbance to the informal networks or normative beliefs.

Another aspect worth reflecting upon is the high court’s repeated emphasis on the absence of elections. While elections are a democratic necessity, their mere presence or absence cannot guarantee participatory culture or safety, but nevertheless, this is an urgent unmet need. In many institutions, union elections (when they are held) are marred by intimidation, rigging, or pre-decided candidate lists by political bosses. In others, uncontested elections mask the lack of democratic spirit on campus. In this context, the state’s abdication of responsibility in ensuring free, fair and regular elections over the years is itself a part of the problem. 

The crisis of campus governance

The high court’s order must also be read in the backdrop of a broader crisis in the governance of higher education in West Bengal. Over the past decade, campus violence, faculty intimidation and bureaucratic overreach have been normalised. The law college rape case is only the latest and most extreme manifestation of this structural rot.

Removing physical symbols of political occupation, like union rooms, will not reverse this decay unless it is accompanied by institutional reform that prioritises autonomy, accountability, and student safety.

Instead of top-down closures, what is needed is a bottom-up effort to reclaim campuses for students, not as foot soldiers of political parties but as active citizens engaged in critical dialogue. This involves fostering alternative spaces for student expression through academic forums, cultural collectives and inclusive participatory bodies.

In the current scenario, even if the union rooms go, the party flags will remain. Leaders will continue to emerge, not from ballots, but from backroom consensus based on loyalty to political patrons. The challenge before us is about reimagining the role of student participation in public universities.

India has a rich history of student politics. It has resisted colonial power, opposed autocracy and even shaped social reforms. But when student bodies become proxies for party control and lose connection with actual student needs, they transform from democratic spaces to hegemonic enclosures.

The goal should not be to banish student politics from campus, but to ensure it is genuinely student-led, inclusive and subject to institutional checks. 

Suman Nath is a political anthropologist and teaches anthropology at Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Government College, New Town, Kolkata.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.