To a campus that prides itself on being progressive and gender-sensitive, where women and men have actively struggled for gender equality, the production and circulation of a sex clip involving two students came as a rude shock. In the wake of that event, we had to confront several issues, concerning the response of the campus, media as well as that of the JNU Administration.

Activists brought the matter to the notice of the campus committee against sexual harassment (GSCASH), all the while seeking to avoid further violations of the woman’s privacy. The GSCASH did initiate action, leading to enquiries against the accused. But meanwhile the media got hold of the story, mostly dealing with it in sensationalist style, with scant regard for any privacy norms.

Following media reports on the issue, the JNU Administration rusticated two students and suspended one for their role in producing and circulating this tape. A police case has been filed against the accused, with university acting as a complainant.

The crime that took place is one that was perpetrated by a few, but shared in by many more. The video was watched widely, copies were searched for, viewed on the net and passed on to others. Sadly, it continues to circulate on the internet, showing how pervasive and insidious the culture of voyeurism and cyber-crime has become in this new age of technology. AISA, pointing out that the same society that participated in this voyeuristic crime was now condemning the victim of it, called for introspection on part of those that shared in this violation of a woman’s privacy and dignity, and this position met with widespread appreciation and consensus in the student community.

The crime was a cynical betrayal of intimate trust: one of the worst forms of sexual violence that can be perpetrated on a woman. The woman who was victimised had her education interrupted, as her parents removed her from the campus. And there were more far-reaching consequences for other women too – we are told by many students that parents are refusing to allow their sisters to apply for education in JNU and Delhi. And for women already studying in JNU, the Administration has begun trying to restrict their freedom and mobility on the campus. Within days, the Dean of Students issued a circular striking down the hard-won freedoms enjoyed by women and men. It restricted women’s access to men’s hostels, barred their entry after 10.30 pm, and also curtailed interaction in the hostel messes. This would impact not only on the relatively open and democratic interaction between men and women in JNU but would seriously curtail women’s participation in social and political activities alongside men (for instance, it would make it very difficult for women to attend meeting of student groups).

Most student groups on campus opposed such administrative action. The broad majority of the student community agreed that the sexual act itself (which was clearly consensual) is not something shameful or condemnable. Rather, what is to be condemned is the fact that a young woman’s most private moments were secretly caught on camera, bared for display, exposed to the public by those close to her, and circulated without her knowledge or consent.

AISA along with other student organizations were active in a large students’ protest in which students condemned the making of the video, as also the irresponsible reportage by the corporate media which fuelled the very culture of consumption responsible for circulating the tape. The JNU Proctor, in a statement to the media saying that JNU students were “misusing their freedom” and giving JNU a bad name. Echoing this, a group calling itself the ‘savejnucampaign’ took out posters blaming ‘sexual openness’ for vitiating campus atmosphere, and arguing that interaction between women and men in private spaces should be curtailed. Protesting against such attitudes, students asserted that the answer to crimes against women was not to shrink but rather to expand women’s freedom and democracy between men and women. By invoking the logic of protectionism and JNU’s ‘honour’, the administration is replicating patriarchal arguments for curtailing women’s freedom for their own ‘benefit’.

Right-wing groups such as the ABVP, while condemning the incident, emphasized that it went against ‘Indian culture’ where women are ‘worshipped’ and ‘venerated’. At the demonstration, women activists challenged this view of women and demanded equality, not worship.

Clearly, the issues raised by the episode do not end with the punishment of perpetrators. Rather, on campus and beyond, a culture of equality, justice and freedom has to be forged, negotiated and asserted every day, and this is the challenge for AISA, as for other progressive groups.