The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation sparked fresh controversy on Friday night by releasing a revised draft of the Indian Statistical Institute Bill, 2025. Despite government claims of improvement, faculty members at the prestigious institute have dismissed the amendments as merely cosmetic changes that fail to address core concerns about institutional autonomy.
Government Versus Academic Control
In a strongly worded petition to the ministry, ISI faculty members expressed alarm over the proposed governance structure. They argued that establishing a board of governors dominated by government nominees would fundamentally transform the ISI from a self-governed academic society into a government-controlled corporate entity.
Arijit Bishnu, an ISI faculty member, clarified the historical context: "The ISI Act of 1959 vested authority in a council with strong academic representation and procedural safeguards against any possible government overreach. However, the central government always had powers of review, inspection, and temporary control only under specific conditions with due process."
Key Changes in Revised Draft
The revised draft maintains the controversial clause stating that "every centre will have its own management council as decided by the board." The board retains extensive powers to establish new centres or modify, merge, relocate, or even discontinue existing centres.
Significantly, the board has been designated as the "principal policy-making executive body" of the institute in the revised draft, with its powers further specified and strengthened. The number of board representatives has increased from three to five persons.
While the first draft already granted the board powers to establish departments, faculties, or schools of studies, the revised version requires the board to seek recommendations from the management council before taking such actions. However, many faculty members perceive this as another layer of bureaucratic control rather than genuine consultation.
Controversial Provisions and Revisions
One significant change between the two drafts involves financial objectives. The initial version stated that the institute's mission would include generating and managing "resources effectively, with the aim of becoming financially self-sustaining."
ISI faculty and staff had strongly objected to this provision, alleging it would lead to discrimination against economically disadvantaged students and encourage revenue generation at the expense of academic integrity. Following these protests, the ministry dropped this controversial clause from the revised draft.
The fundamental conflict centers on the balance between government oversight and academic independence. Faculty members maintain that the proposed changes represent a systematic erosion of the institute's autonomous character, potentially compromising its academic excellence and research integrity.
The ministry has characterized the draft release as part of its "pre-legislative consultative process," but faculty skepticism remains high as the revised document appears to maintain substantial government control over the institute's governance structure.
