My experience has been that all guardians and most students, excepting a microscopic minority of beneficiaries, are vehemently opposed to the type of student politics that is practiced these days in our country. In fact, they are strongly in favour of banning politics using students, although not student politics of the traditional kind.

Today, student politics refers to the activities of the student wings or front organisations of various political parties. These are partisan activities carried out primarily for the interests of certain political quarters or interest groups.

In fact, the beneficiaries of such politics are the political parties and the so-called student leaders who get patronage (such as contracts, commissions) and other illegal payoffs. Illegal benefits often include payments from students for admission into educational institutions or accommodation in hostels, and toll collections from businesses.

Student politics today rarely serve the interests of ordinary students. Students are often forced to participate in strikes, protests and demonstrations called by political parties. Thus, student politics has degenerated into using students, through front organisations, for political ends of politicians, rather than politics by students for their own interests.

Most students are unwilling victims rather than willing participants of such politics. Hooligans, musclemen and non-students are regularly used for enforcing such exploitation. Many so-called student leaders are non-students or students by name only. Consequently, student politics has now largely become politics by non-students or politicians, through exploitation of students.

Such was not the characteristic of student politics in the past. In the old days, an elected student's union was the centre of many cultural, and related, activities for the welfare of students. It protected and promoted the interests of students.

The union also provided avenues for students to hone their leadership abilities. In fact, the most meritorious students got elected to such bodies. Students in general were guided by moral stands, and they invariably displayed anti-establishment sentiments. Students got organized primarily to participate in student union elections, instead of serving political masters.

Ideology -- rather than becoming the B-team of, or developing subservient relationship with, political parties -- was the driving force behind student organizations. This author, as a serious student activist during the 11-point movement of the late 1960s, knows this from first-hand experience.

Historically, students did get involved in politics at times of national crisis to protect larger public interests. Students largely spearheaded the language movement, the 11-point movement, the liberation war, and the anti-autocracy movement of 1990.

However, those movements were carried out not for partisan interests or for reaping narrow benefits. Students participated in those movements out of patriotism, and because of their strong sense of social commitment.

With student wings coming totally under the control of political parties, it will be impossible these days for students to unite for a common national purpose, because they are totally divided along party lines and narrow interests. In fact, front organisations were developed by political parties to prevent such unity.

The degeneration of student politics into partisan squabbles has had high costs. It has turned our institutions of higher education, especially public institutions, into dens of violence and illegal and immoral activities. Consequently, over the years, many precious lives were lost and many careers destroyed. "Session jams" caused the wasting of valuable years of the lives of countless young people.

More seriously, because of both student and teacher politics, we as a nation failed to develop a system of quality higher education which is essential in today's knowledge-based, interrelated world economy.

Because of these consequences, some of our national leaders in the past spoke out against the ugly sides of the so-called student politics, and even offered to disband it provided a consensus could be developed with their political opponents. There now appears to be a national consensus among the general public against the exploitative student politics that is currently in practice. But, how to go about it?

A law already exits in our books against using and exploiting students for political gains. Our Penal Codes make student politics, as is practiced today, an offense. Section 153B of the law states: "Inducing students, etc. to take part in political activity -- Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise induces or attempts to induce any student, or any class of students, or any institution interested in or connected with students, to take part in any political activity, which disturbs or undermines or is likely to disturb or undermine, the public order shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to two years or with fine, or with both."

Political activity includes activities like processions, strikes, demonstrations and meetings arranged for a political purpose. Unfortunately, successive governments never applied the law. To remedy this, what is now needed is to lay out the mode and procedures for prosecuting this offense and vigorously enforce it.

It must also be noted that for political parties to have front organisations appears to be a violation of our Constitution. The formation of front organizations were legalised under the Political Parties Regulation, 1976 (Regulation), section 2(d) of which defines political party to mean: "any association or body of individuals which pursues, or is engaged in, any activity with political purpose including propagation of any political opinion and includes any affiliated, associated or front organisation, such as, student, labour, cultural, peasant and youth organisation, of such association or body."

However, according to the Constitution (Article 152(1), political party "includes a group or combination of persons who operate within or outside Parliament under a distinctive name and who hold themselves out for the purpose of propagating a political opinion or engaging in any other political activity;" and this definition clearly does not include front organizations.

Thus, the Political Parties Regulation, 1976 is inconsistent with the Constitution. To remedy this, and to bring the regulation in conformity with the Constitution, the clause "includes any affiliated, associated or front organisation, such as, student, labour, cultural, peasant and youth organisation, of such association or body" must be deleted from its section 2(d). This will automatically de-link student politics from political parties. The Regulation may also be altogether repelled, or be replaced by a new law.

To ensure that exploitative type of student politics comes to an end, an additional condition must be added to the registration of political parties, a requirement recently proposed by the Election Commission in response to popular demands.

For this purpose, a new proviso must be added to the proposed amendment of the Article 90A of The Representation of People Order, 1972, as: "Provided that no political party which maintains front organisations affiliated to it shall be registered by the Commission."

To conclude, we strongly feel that, in the greater national interest, the student fronts must be de-linked from political parties, bringing an end to politics using young students, which has already caused serious harm to the nation.

However, we are not opposed to student politics for the interests of students, as was historically practiced by students themselves, and which centred around elections of student unions of educational institutions.

We are also strongly for upholding the rights of students to join politics, which they should do by directly joining the main political parties. We hope that our politicians will show the courage, wisdom and sagacity to rise to the occasion, and do what is right for the greater national interest rather than what is expedient.

In making the decision, they must remember that they will have to govern the nation in the future, and deal with these thorny issues in coming days.

Dr Badiul Alam is Secretary, Shujan.