Abul Quasem Haider
OVER 190,000 students now study in 52 non-government universities approved by the government under the Non-Government Universities Act-1992 and the Revised Non-Government Universities Act-1998. The government withdrew permission of four other universities a few years ago. The sponsors are trying their best for permission to reopen.
The government has taken various measures since 2004 to make the present act in force, as void. In 2008, the then caretaker government promulgated the Non-Government Universities Ordinance 2008. The ordinance died a natural death due to its non-ratification by the new parliament. But there is a fresh move by the government and the University Grants Commission for a new law to control the non-government universities. A draft Non-Government Universities Act was circulated for eliciting opinions of different circles. The Association of Private Universities of Bangladesh (APUB) opposed the contradictory provisions in the draft law. APUB has already given its objection to the government in writing, clearly mentioning how the proposed law would foil the very purpose of having non-government universities. But the government seems to be non-receptive to what the non-government universities have to say on this major issue of public interest. Before completing the evaluation from different aspects, the cabinet has approved, on principle, the draft with many contradictory provisions on October 19.
Under the Acts of 1992 and 1998, the board of trustees, regency council and the board of governors work together. But the proposed law seeks to create administrative conflicts between the syndicate and the board of trustees.
It stipulates an interim charter and a permanent charter for a new university, though there should its no interim charter to allow a university to function tentatively.
The stipulation of five per cent full free studentship in the proposed law could make a non-government universities' grants, enviable. A one per cent free studentship is what the non-government universities can afford. And the matter should be left to the universities. The proposed law empowers the University Grants Commission (UGC) to intervene in the autonomy of the private universities on the issue of five per cent free studentship by requiring the universities to send compliance reports to the UGC.
The new law would debar the private universities from transferring their land to any person or organisation. But it is not clear whether or not it would create problems, for mortgaging their land and fixed assets for borrowing for development. Many of the universities implemented development work with loans by mortgaging their fixed assets.
The provision proposed to required private universities create boards of trustees would force them to have an unnecessary authority that would breed conflicts in running the institutions.
The new law seeks to stipulates how many officials should be there in a private university though it should be sole responsibility of a university itself. Such compulsions would create an extra financial burden of a university administration. It stipulates that each private university must have a syndicate headed by the vice chancellor. Under the laws of 1992 and 1998, the syndicate and the trustee are a single authority for acting on the interests of a university. But the proposed act would require a nine-member syndicate with a representative form the board of trustee, one to be nominated by the government and the others, by the University Grants Commission. It will lead to full control by the government and the UGC. How a 100 per cent private university can have eight, out of nine syndicate members, from the government? The government cannot decide that the vice chancellor will head the syndicate. At least seven members of the syndicate should be from among the trustees.
And the syndicate chairman should be elected by its members on consensus.
It stipulates that the vice chancellor should head the finance committee, though rationally, the founder or a trustee should head it. Without the liability of the founder or a trustee, no bank will ever finance a private university.
A private university can not be compared with an MPO-listed school, college or madrashah as education programme of the proposed law seeks to suggest. With the approval of the curriculum committee and the academic council, a private university should be able to open new faculties and departments, as is a universally accepted practice with private universities.
The provision of cancellation of charter of private universities by the government or at the recommendation of the University Grants Commission (UGC) will make the universities completely insecure. Under the amended act of 1998 the charter cancellation can be done by a judge of the supreme court in the event of irregularities. The existing law allowed appeal against cancellation. The provision of the new law would keep private universities under constant threat.
The proposed law stipulates formation of an accreditation council exclusively for the private universities without specifying its formation or standard of quality.
The provision is discriminatory for the private universities, because there is an accreditation council for the government universities. Again an accreditation council must be independent, neutral and free from government control. The council should be equally relevant for public and private universities.
The provision of obtaining UGC approval for determining student fees will allow more government say in the management of a private university through the UGC. It would make it a government-controlled institution.
The proposed law would require each private university to take UGC approval in deciding the salary structure and service regulations of the teachers, officers and other staff. A private institution should be free to decide its salary structure and service regulations.
The association of the private universities would request the prime minister to take into account its suggestions before the enactment of the new law. The UGC, established under a presidential order in 1973, should look after the public universities to improve the quality of education and research. Intervention into private universities cannot be their responsibility.
The new law would require the private universities to be run like the non-performing government institutions. The proposed law would be completely contrary to world-wide trend of privatisation and decentralisation of higher education for better results. Here it would be relevant to quote the Indian Minister for Human Resource Development, Kapil Sibal, on higher education. "There is not such a thing as university grants commission in the West. The All India Council of Technical Education and Medical Council of India in west and these Indian regulatory institutions, 'What can I say, destroyed our entire efforts to take education forward, it is extremely important 'to release' higher education institutions from the control of government to promote a competitive environment, we have to allow our universities to float their own degrees" in a competitive environment, only good universities will survive." This policy allowed the expansion of quality higher education is India.
In Bangladesh, the control mindset is providing only negative results. India is trying its best to move out of its old concept of nationalisation to allow private sector-led growth of higher education. But Bangladesh continues to lag behind, wasting its time on laws to stifle the growth of private universities. To make the Bangladesh youth globally competitive there is no alternative, to allow independent and autonomous higher education to educate them.
The writer is a founder Chairman, Eastern University & Vice Chairman, Association of Private Universities of Bangladesh
JAFAR IQBAL
ID: 091-27-128
Department of Real Estate
Daffodil International University
