Content:
- The Indian university and the search for a V-C
- An India-U.S. trade agreement and the test of WTO laws
The Indian university and the search for a V-C
Context: The UGC’s Draft Regulations 2025 propose changes in the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, reducing State executive influence and broadening eligibility criteria, sparking debates on autonomy, governance, and academic leadership.
Relevance :GS 2(Education ,Governance)
Practice Question:
Discuss the implications of the UGC’s Draft Regulations 2025 on the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, focusing on institutional autonomy, federalism, and academic leadership in India. (250 words)
Reservations on UGC Draft Regulations 2025
- The draft regulations have raised concerns, especially regarding:
- The method of appointment of Vice-Chancellors (V-Cs)
- Broadening the criteria for selecting V-Cs
- These concerns are significant in the context of:
- Federal structure of governance
- Legal precedents set by the Supreme Court
The Role of State Executive in V-C Appointments
- The Supreme Court has minimized the role of State executives in V-C appointments.
- Earlier, State statutes allowed government nominees in search-cum-selection committees.
- The Court has ruled against this in several landmark cases:
- Gambhirdan K. Gadhvi vs State of Gujarat (2019)
- Sonali Chakravarti Banerjee (2022)
- Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S vs Dr. Rajasree M.S. (2022)
- Dr. Premachandran Keezhoth vs Chancellor, Kannur University (2023)
- Key ruling: Any influence of the State executive renders the appointment process void ab initio (invalid from the beginning), even if the appointee is qualified.
UGC’s Proposed Changes in the Selection Process
- The search-cum-selection committee will include only highly qualified persons who have held V-C or equivalent positions.
- Members will be nominated by:
- Chancellor of the university
- University executive body
- UGC
- This structure aligns with Central University statutes, where the Visitor (President of India) and UGC nominees, rather than government representatives, conduct the selection process.
Counterarguments by State Governments
- State executives argue that:
- State universities are established through State Legislature statutes.
- State governments provide the majority of funding.
- State universities must align with regional development needs.
- They contribute to the State’s innovation ecosystem and must work with government research bodies.
- Central universities have limited enrollment capacity, and private universities may not be affordable for many students.
Possible Solutions
Option 1: Consensus-based Selection
- The university executive could nominate an independent former academic, acceptable to the government.
- The nominee must not be a government officer or politically affiliated person.
- This ensures neutrality while considering State concerns.
Option 2: Limited State Representation
- The UGC may allow a State-nominated member in the search committee.
- The nominee must be:
- A former V-C or equivalent.
- Independent of direct political influence.
- The idea is to balance participation while ensuring academic autonomy.
Broadening Eligibility Criteria for V-Cs
- The draft regulations propose expanding V-C eligibility beyond traditional academia.
- Previously, courts (especially the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court) interpreted UGC regulations strictly, limiting eligibility to:
- 10 years of professorship
- Teaching and research experience
Need for a Wider Talent Pool
- Universities require leaders with:
- Expertise in public policy, government, industry, and international organizations.
- High-impact research, communication, networking, and strategic vision.
- Backgrounds in public diplomacy, creative fields, and even sports.
- Globally, universities value diverse leadership skills, not just academic credentials.
- The UGC’s attempt aligns with modern higher education leadership trends.
Need for a Paradigm Shift in University Leadership
- Indian universities must evolve into dynamic, innovative institutions.
- Traditional selection based solely on academic seniority is outdated.
- Amanda Goodall’s view (from “Socrates in the Boardroom”):
- V-Cs should not be reclusive scholars.
- They must blend philosophy with business acumen and vision.
- The UGC’s move to diversify leadership selection is a step toward modernizing Indian universities.
An India-U.S. trade agreement and the test of WTO laws
Background and Context
- On February 13, 2025, India and the U.S. agreed to negotiate a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) by the fall of 2025.
- This agreement is not labeled as a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) but remains a multi-sector trade agreement.
- Given that both nations are WTO members, the agreement must comply with WTO trade law, particularly the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provisions.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations)
Practice Question:
Discuss the challenges India faces in negotiating a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) with the U.S. under WTO regulations. How can India ensure compliance with WTO laws while safeguarding its economic interests? (250 words)
WTO’s Most Favoured Nation (MFN) Principle and Exceptions
- MFN Principle:
- Prohibits discrimination between trading partners.
- Any preferential trade treatment offered to one country must be extended to all WTO members.
- Exceptions:
- Free Trade Agreements (FTAs): Allowed under Article XXIV of GATT.
- Interim Agreements: Temporary arrangements leading to an FTA.
- Enabling Clause: Allows developed countries to provide trade preferences to developing countries.
Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) under WTO Law
- FTAs are permitted as exceptions to the MFN principle but must meet strict conditions:
- Article XXIV.8(b) of GATT: Requires elimination of tariffs and trade barriers on “substantially all trade” between FTA members.
- The meaning of “substantially all trade” is undefined but implies high coverage of trade sectors.
- WTO members must be notified of the FTA.
- Concerns for India-U.S. BTA:
- If it reduces tariffs on only selective products, it may violate WTO law.
- For legality, it must cover a large proportion of trade or be categorized as an interim agreement.
Interim Agreements: A Possible Legal Route
- Article XXIV.5 of GATT allows countries to enter an interim agreement to prepare for an eventual FTA.
- Conditions:
- Must be necessary for forming an FTA.
- Must include a clear plan and schedule to establish the FTA, ideally within 10 years.
- Challenges for India-U.S. BTA:
- If used only to bypass MFN rules and not genuinely leading to an FTA, it would be legally questionable.
The Enabling Clause and Its Limitations
- Allows preferential market access to developing countries.
- However, India-U.S. BTA cannot use this route because:
- The agreement seems to provide better access for U.S. products in India.
- The spirit of the enabling clause is to support developing countries, not to mutually reduce tariffs between a developing and a developed country.
WTO Compliance and India’s Strategic Position
- Potential WTO Violations by the U.S.:
- Reciprocal Tariffs Policy: Introduced during Donald Trump’s presidency, conflicts with WTO principles.
- Violates MFN Principle and Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT) for developing countries.
- Contradicts bound tariff rate obligations, which cap tariff increases.
- India’s Policy Considerations:
- As a country advocating a rule-based trading order, India must resist any compromise on WTO principles.
- The BTA should align with legal trade frameworks rather than short-term economic or political gains.
