18 November, 2019

Blog

VC Election In Jaffna: An Open Season For Academic Suicide

By A group of concerned academics, Jaffna

The health of an academic institution calls for norms and restraints to be observed in social behavior, checks to be enforced and a readiness to be accountable when well-founded complaints of impropriety are made. In this spirit, when a Vice Chancellor is to be elected, the university community has a right to know the strengths of the contestants and expects the electors – the Council – to listen to them and to vote for the most qualified candidate in the best interests of the University.

Sadly, what we saw in Jaffna University recently, was leading members of the Council working through a government-aligned political party to abuse the Vice-Chancellor’s office to coerce voters. One of the tactics used was to put forward a mostly unknown dummy candidate who obtained the second highest vote. The result speaks for itself. The level of desperation to forestall any change in the university administration is a pointer to a need for radical overhaul.

The Election

The contestants at the election were the incumbent Vice-Chancellor Prof. Vasanthy Arasaratnam (VC), Prof. Vigneswaran and Dr. Alvapillai, from the University; Dr. S. Gunapalan, Head of Management and Commerce at South Eastern University and Dr. Ratnajeevan Hoole, Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan State University, who had previously stood for election in 2010. Arasaratnam and Vigneswaran, as candidates, were barred from voting as members of the University Council of 27 persons, leaving 25 council members entitled to cast a vote each for a maximum of three candidates of their choice. Names of the three receiving the highest votes were to be sent to the President, who made his choice from among the three.

Douglas and Rajapaksa

Douglas and Rajapaksa

The Council had 14 external members who were appointed by the President and 13 internal members, including the deans and senate representatives – only 11 of the latter were entitled to vote after VC Arasaratnam and Vigneswaran were recused. Since 2007, the appointment of external members to the University Council of Jaffna University became a matter of EPDP patronage. The EPDP is a northern regional party and member of the current government. The EPDP has maintained a tight grip on the external members, who before each monthly council session are required to attend a pre-council meeting, chaired by the EPDP. At one or more pre-council meetings before each election of a Vice-Chancellor, the EPDP has made recommendations on how the external members, who comprise the numerical majority of the Council, should vote. A Vice-Chancellor is unlikely to have a second term if he or she loses EPDP patronage. During the 2010 election the EPDP shifted its patronage to Vasanthy Arasaratnam resulting in her predecessor losing office.

Following the Council meeting in February 2014, it was rumoured that current VC, Vasanthy Arasaratnam had lost the patronage of the EPDP and that she had subsequently made renewed pledges  to the EPDP Leader, Minister of Traditional Industries and Small Enterprise Development, Douglas Devananda. This was confirmed by the EPDP leader himself in remarks made at the pre-council meeting, the day before the election was held, on 7th March 2014.

The rapprochement between the VC and the EPDP leader reported above had further ramifications for the politicization of the University. Faculty were told by council members and senior academics that two internal council members (and perhaps others) met Minister Devananda and pleaded with him to support VC Arasaratnam.

Ratnajeevan Hoole appears to have been a threat to VC Arasaratnam. He had contested in 2010 and as one of the top three vote-getters, had been selected to be Vice-Chancellor by the President. Under the advice of Minister Devananda, however, the President changed his mind and named Vasanthy Arasaratnam Vice-Chancellor instead. According to council members and senior academics, one of the deans was tasked by the VC to find a dummy candidate, whose coming among the first three would not be a threat to Arasaratnam but would exclude Hoole. This resulted in the successful dummy candidacy of Dr. Gunapalan, who would indeed score the second largest number of votes.

Friday 7th March 2014: The Pre-council meeting and after

In a pre-Council meeting on March 7th, Minister Devananda addressed the 14 external members, and gave a history of how various candidates had approached him. He said that VC Arasaratnam had met him and emotionally appealed for his support, confirming earlier rumours of his second thoughts about her. Hoole, he said, had written to him to put behind their personal differences but had failed to publish an article under his name declaring his support for Minister Devananda and the Government. According to Minister Devananda, Vigneswaran had approached him through an intermediary a week earlier, and he had said it was too late to support him at the election, but on a subsequent contact, Minister Devananda had promised to do something. This resulted in a change of plan.

The Minister’s initial plan was reportedly to ask the 14 external members to cast their three votes, one each to VC Arasaratnam, Gunapalan and Alvapillai. In the changed plan VC Arasaratnam, the dummy candidate and Vigneswaran were each to receive a vote from all the external members.  The Minister wished to exclude Hoole, but had evidently not shown overt preference for VC Arasaratnam, who became alarmed by the change of plan. Other sources contend that two council members, whose names are known, had been tasked to give one vote each to VC Arasaratnam and Alvapillai and withhold the third vote.

Having announced the new plan, Devananda addressed a question to the two senior council members whom he suspected would act independently, “So what do you think?” One of them answered, “Since you were the one that appointed me to the Council, I have to do as you say. But I have one reservation. I do not know this person Gunapalan at all. How can I vote for him?” Devananda answered that he need not, and asked him to give one vote each to VC Arasaratnam and Vigneswaran.

The other senior member whose obedience was in doubt had from time to time, privately voiced strong criticism of irregularities on selection boards and had kept off some of them, saying that he would, if he participated, become party to cheating and corruption at the University. To the Minister’s probing question, he said that he would vote only for those who had been in Jaffna throughout.

One of the Deans in conversation with other faculty members, and not knowing of Minister Devananda’s change of plan, referred to the initial plan and said that Vigneswaran may not get any votes, and ‘if he gets one, it would definitely be mine’.

Evidently, someone impressed upon Minister Devananda the need to call up the internal members and instruct them on how to vote. VC Arasaratnam had in fact called at Devananda’s office after the pre-Council meeting and left at about 7.30 PM. Devananda’s calls to internal members went on into Saturday morning, the day of the voting. Some reported that these were courteous. Others got curt instructions not to vote for Hoole.” But Devananda did not seem inclined to openly exclude Vigneswaran.

Arasaratnam was confronted with a situation where the internal preferences might enable Vigneswaran to poll more votes than her. She resorted to calling some of the internal members at about 8.00 to 8.30 PM, shortly after leaving the EPDP office. Asking someone to vote for her was perfectly legitimate, but as a candidate, she took the questionable step of telling persons to vote against Vigneswaran on personal grounds. She called one Dean and asked if he would vote for Hoole. The Dean replied that he would give one vote to her and one to Vigneswaran. Taken aback, she asked whether another prominent Dean had not called him and told him about the latter plan to vote for her alone?

When the voting took place the next day, VC Arasaratnam obtained 24 votes.  Only one among all the voters had not voted for her. Gunapalan obtained 16. It is likely that he obtained 11 from the external members and five from internal members. In the end the dummy candidate had creditably done well enough to be appointed Vice-Chancellor. Vigneswaran obtained 13 votes. The facts above suggest 12 from external members as directed by Minister Devananda, and just one from an internal member. Hoole and Alvapillai got two votes each.

Consequences of the Election

Sections of the university community have until now challenged the Administration on corrupt practices in academic appointments. Among them are the cases of Surenthini Sithamparanathan who was rejected for the post of Probationary Lecturer in Sports Science, and Miss. Nilani Kanesharatnam for Probationary Lecturer in Zoology. The Vice-Chancellor cancelled the appointment of the candidate chosen for Sports Science after Miss. Sithamparanathan pointed out irregularities that were blatantly problematic in a letter to administration. The candidates were re-interviewed at the end of the year. Both Miss. Sithamparanathan and the previously selected candidate, together with the rest, were rejected on the grounds that their subject knowledge was inadequate. How a candidate previously selected as suitable for the job could a short time later be found unsuitable by almost the same selection committee is a mystery. The abuse involved in selection boards, sometimes having no representatives with any subject knowledge, passing judgment on well-qualified candidates as having poor subject knowledge has been raised.

In place of Miss. Kanesharatnam who had a first class and a gold medal from this university, a candidate far inferior was selected. Letters of protest to the Council, from the candidate herself in December 2013, and subsequently by the JUSTA have been ignored. Both the Vice Chancellor and one of the Deans involved in vote-engineering have been leading members of all selection committees above. This leads to a grave question.

Integrity of Appointments and Elections

One sees practically no dissent in our selection committees. Take the Vice Chancellor’s election, where the voting was fixed. Calls to internal members by Minister Devananda, and the Vice Chancellor herself, had a strong hint of unpleasant consequences. The fears of those they called are very real. The voting was on single-sheet ballots where electors selected up to three names. These ballots are held by an administration whose top officials have regular commerce with the EPDP office. The EPDP knows how the external members voted. The voting of at least four commonly-known servile deans would also enable the EPDP to make inferences about how the remaining half a dozen internal members voted.

The matter has been especially troubling in recent years when the Council and university selection committees approved political appointees for the non-academic staff positions who fared miserably when tested and interviewed by the University community. The level of coercion in the system is most obvious among the non-academic staff. There has been intimidation of members of the non-academic staff union who protested against abuses in selections. Once the EPDP obtained a virtual monopoly of staff appointments, new appointees who did not join the new EPDP set-up union have been threatened with transfers to Vavuniya or Killinochchi. These threats will eventually be enforced through the Administration.

Most scandalous is the fact that forces that have no real interest in our education, the future of the society, or the University, will even more have a monopoly over the administration and appointments to the University. This is all done cynically. Cynicism about the persons they appoint to high office is readily seen from the manner of the Vice-Chancellor’s election. Under the present dispensation, we could expect the Council to blatantly ignore all protest against abuse. We could expect a disastrous escalation of bad candidates smuggled into academic positions with total impunity. The University’s future is indeed bleak.

The role of the academic and non-academic staff who have been smuggled in can be seen in their hostility to the unions, their unquestioning advocacy of those in power, and their reliance on political patronage for career advancement. Once we show the politicians that we are corrupt, there is no reason why they should not take over all appointments, as they have done for non-academic staff and the running of the Council itself. After the recent election, we should have no illusions. The public spends two lakhs of rupees on each student in a year. Can our increasingly corrupt and politicized universities give them their money’s worth? Or have we become frauds taking the public’s money to spread corruption into the body politic while giving paper degrees of little worth?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 4
    8

    Wish someone could circulate the above photo among the brainwashed US, Cameron lackeys in Geneva. to dispel the Diaspora’s gigantic false propaganga to portray our President as a Sinhala Buddhist extremist.

    Look at his clasped hands towards Lord Siva.

    Has anyone ever seen the Vellalas in a Buddhist Temple, let alone bringing their hands together in respect of Lord Buddha ?.

    • 9
      1

      K.A Sumanasekera

      As a member of first nation, by powers vested in me I now pronounce you a Vellala. You may now kiss Sampanthan’s bottom.

      • 4
        1

        KAS would love to do that “You may now kiss Sampanthan’s bottom. “

    • 3
      1

      Yes. They look like Appar and Sambandhar at Thirupugaloor Siva Temple. Very melting.

    • 2
      2

      The war criminals, Rajapaksa and Dogleash, need divine intervention to save them from the noose tightening around their fat necks. No wonder Rajapaksa is praying in temples, churches and mosques.

    • 1
      1

      what is the benefit of clasping hands in a temple after being instrumental(ordering the atrocities and sheltering the culprits) in killing thousands and thousands of innocent men, women, children and babies, abducting, torturing innocent citizens, destroying churches, temples and mosques, bombing places of worships with people sheltering inside. What is the merit in pretending to be pious after robbing the country of its wealth?

  • 3
    3

    A glimpse into what Sri Lanka has been turned into! What sort of graduates would such a university produce? What would be their values and standards? Would they be equipped to make this country a better or worse place? The very concept of a university based on mentors, example, leadership, progressive thinking, values and intellectual excellence is being undermined.

    The same degeneracy is progressively and very likely irreversibly, destroying all institutions in this country! Rajan Philip’s article in a parallel thread describes the political roots of this degeneracy.

    The degeneracy that was set in motion soon after independence has progressively taken the country in the wrong direction for a long time. The process has accelerated in recent years. This process has gained a momentum of its own and is accelerating to dangerous speeds. The day of reckoning is not far off. Warning bells are going off all round us and it is time we removed our ear plugs and choose to hear them. We better also put on our seat belts!

    The ‘ Group of concerned Academics’ who choose to remain anonymous in the circumstances prevalent in this country, have done a tremendous public service by opening the lid on a stinking can of worms.

    Dr.Rajasingham Narendran

    • 2
      4

      Dr Narendran,

      Don’t you think Sambandan, in consultation with the Reverend in Britain, the Chief in Canada and the PM in New Jersey should have appointed the VC?.

      Do you think that will stop the ” degeneracy” and groom Tamil intellectuals to take you to your future Eelaam like what Prabakaran was doing……..

  • 2
    6

    What is going on at the University is a disgrace to Tamils and Tamil institutions. It is widely known in Jaffna that one of the senior members referred to in this article is the Vicar General who will likely be our Bishop soon. Some years ago the Vicar General carried a letter from Bishop Savundranayagam to Prabhakaran urging him not to interfere in education in Prof. Hoole’s matter. Now the Church which stood up to Prabhakaran is unable to stand up to Devananda.

    In a related incident when the Principal of Uduvil (run by the Church of South India, the CSI)was sacked following a split in the church and the parents supported the Principal, Devananda sensed a chance to make himself popular. So he urged the CSI Bishop to reverse the decision and was told that nothing could be done because it was a Board decision. The Bishop was told, “Board decision, huh? I have a few graves dug and ready for use.” The Board decision was immediately reversed. Soon thereafter the Bishop had to go to Colombo and his driver mysteriously did not show up. Proceeding therefore to Colombo with a temporary driver, the Bishop was drugged through a tea served by his driver and the unconscious bishop was hacked with an axe with cuts to the forehead and both legs. God saved him after several days in a coma.

    The rout of Tamil society (including the Church) is truly complete. Douglas Devananda has succeeded where Prabhakaran failed.

    • 2
      2

      I hope the above comment is mistaken about Father Gnanapiragasam, the present Vicar General. I expect that he as Vicar General should lead the way in all Council members resigning in protest that Douglas, a man who probably did not pass his OLs, is leading the university.

      One reason our Catholic fathers are not allowed to marry is so that they can stand for principles without worrying about their family and their needs. Why would Vicar General Father Gnanapiragasam want this seat on the Council if he is going to obey Douglas as if he has no brains to think for himself? He has enough high status through the Church and does not need to go and beg Douglas for a Council seat like the others. His duty is to stand for what is best for the university and not what is best for Douglas. That he obediently attends Douglas’ pre-council meetings to hear how he should vote, and then votes accordingly, is not a good example for the rest of us. I therefore find it hard to believe.

      Father Gnapiragasam stayed on in Jaffna through thick and thin while his family urged him to join them abroad. It is this stellar example that this sad episode ruins. I wish him well and the backbone that Bishop Savundranayagam has. I pray that Fr. Gnanapiragasam will be worthy of his predecessor.

      • 2
        0

        “He has enough high status through the Church and does not need to go and beg Douglas for a Council seat like the others”.

        I am also asking the same question myself.

        -Prof.Hoole has enough high status and does not need to go and beg Douglas for the VC post.

    • 2
      1

      Revd.father,to be honest with you, I really don’t understand what the heck is going on in Jaffna.Jaffna people are very intelligent and those who were involved in anti social activities were rejected by them in the past. Tamil media did its best to expose and tarnish DD’s name.What else can be done?Even the Tigers made several suicide attempts on him and could not achieve their goal.May be what Prof.Hoole said carefully to the LLRC is true.
      “THE PUBLIC HAD SEVERE MISGIVINGS ABOUT MINISTER DOUGLAS DEVANANDA ONCE.BET HE HAS WORKED HARD AND SEEMS TO HAVE EARNED A PLACE AMONG THE TAMIL PEOPLE AS JUDGED BY RECENT ELECTIONS WHERE HE HAD THE HIGHEST PREFERENTIAL VOTES IN JAFFNA”

    • 0
      1

      “the unconscious bishop was hacked with an axe with cuts to the forehead and both legs”.

      If Bishops are hacked with an axe, for a Principal’s post, how much more is to be feared for the Vicar General regarding voting for a VC? Fr. Gnanapiragasam is needed to provide for the widows and the orphans in the NE.

      “More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of”. Revd. Father.

  • 1
    3

    A great piece. Thanks for whistle blowing. It is sad that these great academics are scared to reveal their names and are said to be guided by a Council whose members are party to the destruction of the very place they are supposed to guide. If they are honorable men and women, or have the interest of the University at heart, by now they and the VC candidates would have resigned. They appear to have no shame.

    Jaffna University should champion Human Rights. But who can fight for academic freedom in Jaffna when the right to life has become priority number one to fight for daily.

    Minister Douglas Devananda, a thousand namastes to you Sir. Please become good. To take away education from the Jaffna man is the worst cut of all. People in Jaffna hardly see good things or good men that they will soon forget what goodness is. May God grant you a change of heart so that your son in Germany would one day salute your photo and say “now that is my Dad!”. Jaffna people will call you Ellala (Elara) in place of the Scottish name you now carry.

  • 2
    3

    All the Deans and also Dons are not even worth for a cent, then how the Cuncil of the University would do well in the University administration. Most of the Deans and Dons as well as Vasanthy Arasaratnam, (present and future) were appointed and/or prommoted over the back-door. In some case tghey have not met minimum requirements for their appointments as Lecturers in their respective departments in terms of the UGC circullars and codes of ethics previlaing in Universities, two well known examples are former Vice Chancellor Shanmugalingan and the present Vice Chanceloor Vasanthy Arasaratnam. All these might be MIRACLE of ASIA?

  • 1
    0

    “Sections of the university community have until now challenged the Administration on corrupt practices in academic appointments. Among …..”

    All these appointment problems are prevailing in these universities owing the corrupted nature of the University Service Appeals Board. The Chairman Ethiriusooria and the Vice Chairman Anton Alfred are well known corrupted people. All the corrupted fellows should be chased away from the USAB immediately, further their should be stern disciplinary action against to these USAB corrupted people.

  • 1
    2

    “Has anyone ever seen the Vellalas in a Buddhist Temple, let alone bringing their hands together in respect of Lord Buddha ?. “

    Ho ho ho…. Lord Buddha did not want anyone to pray him! Tamils, the early Buddhists well before Sinhalese embraced Buddhism knew this.

  • 0
    1

    Why aren’t the students protesting this? How come Devananda is allowed so much power over the university appointments? Exposing the Devanada cronies will be a first step in stopping this abuse. The Concerned Academics are doing a good job and the elected politicians of the North should take this up with the responsible authorities without delay.

  • 1
    1

    There are hundreds of problems in our universities and these “concerned academics” are only concerned about anointing Prof.Hoole to the VC post.Concerned academics are adopting the tactics used by the armed group .They seem to be underground teachers for human rights(UTHR)?.We can expect more guerilla war from these warriors under different group names.
    No matter what,the government should not interfere in the university matters and let it function independently. But the “academics” who write pages and pages about human rights ,rule of law, transparency etc.,etc also should practise what they preach.
    Professor Hoole preaches that the politicians should not get involved in the university affairs .But,in reality , nobody will come close to Hoole’s effort in going behind the politicians. Hoole tried to outsmart other candidates by all means.Hoole went behind politicians of all colours , but he utterly failed.He mobilized his NGO army to wage this bush war.Hoole tried to influence the council members by telling about his elitist background and western connection.
    Leave alone appointed members by the government,why did the academics members also reject him overwhelmingly?From time to time Hoole and his ilk would pontificate that we need accountability,democracy,rule of law,openness,human rights etc.,etc.We cannot expect Hoole to be a role model with these unethical practices. For them, these are businesses.They don’t want to practise what they preach.They preach these things only for selfish interests.
    With the same council , Hoole came second .This time Hoole came last getting only two votes.What does it mean?More and more people have come to know who Hoole is. Under these circumstances ,it is hard to believe his conspiracy theory.He is only 62,let Hoole wait for the regime change.
    Prof.Hoole thinks that he is always special because of his upbringing and privileges.These privileged people cannot stomach failures or defeat.They always grumble that they fail because of others fault.They never want to look inwards.Whenever he comes everybody should leave way for him.Not many years ago the so called lower cast people should give way when so called high cast people come to the roads.The same way people like Hoole thinks that everybody should give way for him when he wants.Otherwise he will complain about this person,that person,DD,government etc.etc.This is unworthy of a person who aspires to a higher position.
    Can Prof.Hoole deny that he didn’t go behind the politicians?

    VC post to Hoole is What was Vietnam to America.

    • 0
      3

      Ramany K/Jeyanthy Croos/Kamalakannan/Anniyan/D. Rangan

      Which Avathaaram this time you choose? You writing “No matter what,the government should not interfere in the university matters and let it function independently.” But remember you came to a Pre-Council Meeting where your tholan Doglass put his hand in university matters. He told Pre-Council to vote just like described in this article. Why you disagree after you see with your eyes? You and three teachers begged him to order the University Council how to vote no?

      Now you say you do not like interference by politicians. Is tholan not a politician but a saint now? Conclusion from evidence with proof = You and all your EPDP are big time liers and killers.

      • 1
        1

        Ha..Ha…Ha..This time I used Kaampothy.

        This is what Prof.Hoole said carefully to the LLRC .

        “THE PUBLIC HAD SEVERE MISGIVINGS ABOUT MINISTER DOUGLAS DEVANANDA ONCE.BUT HE HAS WORKED HARD AND SEEMS TO HAVE EARNED A PLACE AMONG THE TAMIL PEOPLE AS JUDGED BY RECENT ELECTIONS WHERE HE HAD THE HIGHEST PREFERENTIAL VOTES IN JAFFNA”

        Appu Raasaa….I didnt say this.

    • 0
      0

      Be practical shut the stupid place down and be happy as you JT’s have a very funny complex- very possessive of some outdated crap- we are into Nano tech 10 years on. 3mm heart pacer enters like a mole fixes it and job done 20 mins.You are clinging onto mangoes.Ha ha

      I remember the days JT’s took the YalDevi to Colombo every weekend to attend law college classes and accountancy and they did very well even winning British Gold medals- healthy body healthy mind.

  • 0
    1

    The responsible authorities,including the University Grants Commission that oversee the unis, already know quite well what is going on. UGC will recommend the current VC all the same. They have been informed. They ignore and support the perpetrators, all of them being appointed by the same person. Their highest advisers openly say the President needs DD.

    As for students protesting this you can’t be serious if you are in Sri Lanka. They will be decimated and that would give an excuse to bring in guns and white vans into the premises. Their teachers have families to feed.

  • 0
    1

    “Calls to internal members by Minister Devananda, and the Vice Chancellor herself, had a strong hint of unpleasant consequences”

    “the Bishop was drugged through a tea served by his driver and the unconscious bishop was hacked with an axe ……”

    Does is it mean the Vice Chancellor also a war criminal?

  • 0
    1

    “I pray that Fr. Gnanapiragasam will be worthy of his predecessor”

    In my exprience he had never stood for truth in the University Council, rather he stood with the people in power.

  • 2
    1

    I think Doglass Devananda studied in the Sinhala medium because his name and his Father name all sound Sinhalese. Doglass, Tilvin, Percy all not christian. Hindus dont have lansi names. Budhist have such lansi names. So I will teach a nice little tamil song to Doglass. In my Tamil class they teach us a Swamy Vipulanandar’s poem which can help him. This is year 6 syllabus. Hope Minister pass year 6.

    Not white flowers. Not any flower. But a pure heart flower the excellent God want. (Vellai nira poovumalla, Verentha malarumalla. Ullak kamalamadi Uthamanar venduvathu).

    So this picture show Doglass is wasting everybody’s time in the temple at state expense. Just because you bring President friend God is not impress with you. Doglass heart is not a flower if he have a heart. I don’t have time to put his bad karma list. It will take all my disk.

  • 0
    1

    Dear Ramany K,

    “adopting the tactics used by the armed group ….”

    As you and your comrade are as bloody as Nazis, the concerned academics are to be like that. Very soon your game would come to an end.

    Further, do you/your comrade have vision on these higher education? At least do you/your comrade must have some thing about Universities administrative procedures.

    Why we should not appoint Doglass Devananda as the Vice Chancellor for his life long period. That would be an easy procedure. The council might be his advisory committee and all the meeting could be held at the Theater.

    • 0
      1

      Is there a post called Life-long VC also like Life-Long Professor, that is from birth to death like what Prof. Balasundarampillai now occupies, room and all, at the University when our grad students have no desk to study at?

  • 0
    1

    According to the Article

    When the voting took place the next day, VC Arasaratnam obtained 24 votes.  Only one among all the voters had not voted for her. Gunapalan obtained 16. It is likely that he obtained 11 from the external members and five from internal members. In the end the dummy candidate had creditably done well enough to be appointed Vice-Chancellor. Vigneswaran obtained 13 votes. The facts above suggest 12 from external members as directed by Minister Devananda, and just one from an internal member. Hoole and Alvapillai got two votes each.

    Total % Political % Academic %
    Support Support
    Prof Vasanthy Arasaratnam 24 96% 13 54% 11 46%
    Dr.Gunapalan 16 64% 11 69% 5 31%
    Prof.Vigneswaren 13 52% 12 92% 1 8%
    Dr.Alvapillai 2 8%
    Prof.Hoole 2 8%

    Who has more political suport than accademic? Vasanathy arasaratnam or Vigneswaren.
    What does this artical try to say to the public?
    do not try to say any personel revenges against any one as a common opinion. Do not fool the others??

  • 0
    1

    Dear Mrs.S.Rajah,

    “What does this artical try to say to the public?”

    It is clear from the manner you have some sort of problem in your analytic view.

    It is beyond any doubt Vasanthy Arasaratnam got 24 votes by intimidation from the so called minister and herself. Otherwise she would have be thrown into dust bin long long ago. Apart from all these facts and figures she could not do well (not even to the standard of a university teacher) in her presentation which was held for the so called council members. Then how did she earn that much of votes?

    “do not try to say any personal revenges against any one as a common opinion”

    Yes, she is well known person to take revenges against to students right from the beginning as she is not capable to teach in the faculty. Further, recently she abused her power with regard to the Librarian case.

    Ultimately what you say that any body can take any personal revenges against any one by abusing their authorities or some other means …………… Is it the policy in your kingdom? In this scenario you are talking about democracy. Ver soon you would realize the fact.

  • 0
    1

    Mrs. Rajah,
    I am glad that you tried to do some Mathematical calculations. But then, on what basis, have you arrived at that wrong conclusion? How can you consider those as academic Votes? Your intention seems to be , just to show that the Present VC has more support among the academics

    I trust you read the article properly. The writers indirectly state that the academics too voted as they were told, partly out of fear.

    Ramany K, is of course clever enough not to dispute the given facts. But like a typical Lawyer, twisted the matter and went off at a tangent trying to make the issue one about Hoole who was marginal to the incident. The writers’ reference to Hoole was just incidental. All what they raised is patently about the way the so called academics in the university behaved and gave room for outsiders to intervene.

    There is no point in criticising the Minister, but rather, we must give him the opportunity and right advise to make his contribution to re-building the place- the academic institutions and bringing back the standards of Education, rather than use him for their personal agendas.

  • 0
    1

    Dear Mrs. Rajah,

    I am glad that you tried to do some Mathematical calculations. But then, on what basis, have you arrived at that wrong conclusion? How can you consider those as academic Votes? Your intention seems to be , just to show that the Present VC has more support among the academics

    I trust you read the article properly. The writers indirectly state that the academics too voted as they were told, partly out of fear.

    Ramany K, is of course clever enough not to dispute the given facts. But like a typical Lawyer, twisted the matter and went off at a tangent trying to make the issue one about Hoole who was marginal to the incident.

    The writers’ reference to Hoole was just incidental. All what they raised is patently about the way the so called academics in the university behaved and gave room for outsiders to intervene.

    There is no point in criticising the Minister, but rather, we must give him the opportunity and right advise to make his contribution to re-building the place- the academic institutions and bringing back the standards of Education, rather than use him for their personal agendas.

  • 0
    1

    It is like Dr Tony Tan held Minister of Education and Vice Chancellor of National University of Singapore one time (Currently President of Singapore, why not Douglas Devananda hold the vice chancellor of University of Jaffna simultaneously ?

    Nothing is for ever but season last for a while.

  • 0
    0

    Dear Sukamo (or Sukamillai)

    I think our reshpected Minister Douglas Devananada (Honorary Doctor of Politics beyond compare) can simultaneously manage the posts of Vice Chancellor, Minister, Coffee Maker, Tea Maker and King Maker (at the same time).

    For a gentleman of his caliber – after holding all these posts he will still have ample time left to spend on dressing up like Santa Claus for his office Christmas Party this year!

    Now you know – right?

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.