NTNS: Praxis Meetings on No Tyrants, No Silence

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000

XVII.

Summary

The meeting opened with Member-A’s status report on the campus code-of-conduct push (unified CoC, missing appeals procedure, surveyed peer institutions) and a tangent on inviting staff to NTNS spaces. Then operational planning: working group is logistics-only, deliberation stays open on the forum; summer = online weekly reading circle + active forum, no general meetings; UG1 onboarding via Apex (induction-week slot), CC (club intro flyering), and a casual jam-session-with-discussion. Strategically, a long unresolved debate on political framing — explicit leftism vs issue-first progressive framing — produced a slight lean toward issue-first messaging but no decision; this moves to the forum. Concretely, Member-A briefed the group on the [Redacted] (case subject) DC outcome (made but uncommunicated), the approved security committee plan (lathis, training, bike ambulance, expanded outdoor CCTV with passive monitoring), and open follow-ups on CCTV retention, custody, and signage. Logo tweaks and a “no tyranny no silence” tagline were agreed.

Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000

The IT Amendment Act

The meeting opened with a discussion of the proposed amendments to the IT Act and the rules being circulated by MeitY for public comment. Three provisions drew particular concern.

First, the amendments extend the code of ethics and complaint mechanisms that currently apply to news media to commentary on news and current affairs more broadly — a category whose boundaries remain undefined. Second, the proposed Sahyog mechanism allows the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to refer content to platforms as a formal legal directive; non-compliance would cause platforms to lose safe harbour protections, effectively making ministerial direction enforceable as law. Third, anything issued by MeitY under the new framework would carry legal force.

Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Context & Framing

The session opened by laying out why political and institutional apathy persists at IIITH, and what produces it. Three arguments were put forward.

Meritocracy and the admission pipeline. The selection process rewards a narrow definition of achievement. This shapes who ends up here, what they feel entitled to question, and what they assume they deserve. The composition of the student body is not incidental; it follows from how people got here.