What happens when a private law school, bang in the middle of nowhere, with stringent weekend outing regulations decides to raid rooms- check every single belonging including cupboards, sometimes in the absence of the occupant and goes onto frisk every student coming into college? A group of irate, agitated students, with no belief in the so-called 'approachable, understanding and liberal' administration anymore.

A knee-jerk reaction to multiple calls from agitated parents of newcomers, alleging rampant drug and alcohol abuse does not warrant repressive measures such as this. Needless to say, rooms are left trashed and furniture on stray occasions broken, and even those who are prudent and responsible suffer the ire of such administration conducted harassment. What is completely unjustified is the lack of respect for a student, and the complete disregard for the minutes of a meeting wherein a proper code of procedure is laid down, and statements by the administration to the effect that there will be no such further rampant checking for a substantial period of time are made. This is a significant turn of events running up to a concentrated effort to disregard and stifle student voice. If that is the promotion of a nominal student council, awarded with no powers or involvement in housing and welfare decisions or reprimanding of students who take it upon themselves to voice legitimate concern for administrative action on behalf of the student body or a significant number of students. What transpires is that power and authority seeks to be protected in such a way that any first impressions of a friendly and approachable administration is completely eroded. It is important to point out that room raids also happen very arbitrarily and unequal manner. Disunity amongst the student body members is taken advantage of at this stage for any snitch is afforded protection from such raids whereas other students are subjected to such unreasonable violation of their privacy. It is the administration's stance that everybody would be subjected to checks in order to promote uniformity in procedure, yet in practice, past offenders are singled out.

Perhaps a more reasonable solution would be to check only on reasonable cause, the rooms of those students who have given sufficient reason to be suspicious of. A pick and choose policy may be driven by subconscious nepotism if not anything else. The way these raids are conducted is disrespectful and demeaning because leave aside that the student is treated as a potential criminal, but any polite opposition (even on principle, a plea to be treated as a respectful adult) is met with threats of expulsion.

Is this a solution to curb drug abuse? Any book on psychology and any trained education personnel will tell you that this is not the way to treat a young person, irrespective of whether he is errant or not. Our strict Jesuit-run/ catholic schools to appreciated the psyche of a growing youngster and took reformative action against every truant be it in cases of teenage pregnancy, alcohol or drug abuse. If an adult, well above the age of 18 smokes, how can you expect him not to resort to it given that you do not allow free access outside the campus and nor do you afford him the luxury of a cordoned off smoking area? Isn't legalizing it the best way to regulate it? What excuse do you have of not providing an on-campus counselor for a group of young students? For what purpose do you have a 'qualified' set of security guards and expansive security measures in place? Is it for the protection of the students as a priority (which you have failed to offer considering breaks-in by thieves, and non-residents unlawfully residing on campus, especially when there is no guarantee of their credentials) or to keep an eye on them- every time there is any public display of affection or smoking? Repressive methods as such will only cause disharmony and restfulness amongst the students such that you may have an increased amount of truancy or else, when it comes down to it- an extreme form of rebellion. A reputation wary institute should also be aware of students who encourage prospective students to enroll, and if things remain the way they are, no word-of- mouth publicity will be good publicity. There is no regard for a student- even the brightest.

For starters, professors, including those with multiple LLM's and BCL's must be wary of basics of education and be trained in the psychology of students. Besides, administrations, in order to call themselves truly international and global must begin to involve students in decisions which affect them so closely.