Certain sectors attempt to shift focus from students’ demand for affordable education by resorting to false accusations, edited videos, and allegations of outsider disruption
NEW DELHI/ALIGARH — A peaceful student protest at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) against a sudden and steep hike in fees has snowballed into a national controversy, with protesters facing accusations of being “anti-national” and linked to threats against national security. Students and faculty members say the smear campaign is a deliberate attempt to shift attention from the real issue, making higher education unaffordable for many Muslims, towards unproven allegations that harm the reputation of one of India’s most prestigious minority institutions.
The university, founded in 1875 by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, has long been a symbol of Muslim educational empowerment in India. For generations, AMU has produced judges, scholars, scientists, journalists, and political leaders. Its alumni have contributed significantly to India’s development. But it has also often been the target of political suspicion and stereotyping.
The latest controversy, sparked by a fee hike of 30 to 40 per cent across most courses, has reignited old tensions. Students, already struggling with rising costs, have been protesting for days, holding sit-ins, organising marches, and appealing to the administration to reverse the decision. Yet, instead of engaging with their demands, parts of the media and certain political voices are accusing them of being unpatriotic.
Several short videos have been circulating on social media platforms claiming to show “anti-national” slogans at the protest. One widely shared clip claims that an “AMU alumnus” made derogatory comments about the Indian Tricolour. However, no verified evidence has been presented to prove his connection with the university.
“It is very convenient for them to throw such labels at us,” said Mohammad Asif, a postgraduate student of Political Science. “If you call a Muslim protester anti-national, you don’t have to address his demands. You can just criminalise his voice.”
The students have repeatedly clarified that no anti-India slogans have been raised during the protests. Most slogans, they say, have been about reversing the fee hike, protecting the right to affordable education, and upholding the vision of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.
“We are not here to insult the country. This is our country,” said Rehan Khan, an undergraduate law student. “We are here because we believe education should not be priced beyond the reach of the poor. That is not anti-national, that is pro-India.”
University sources have admitted that some outsiders have been present during the protests, and this has raised concerns that the movement could be deliberately infiltrated to provoke incidents.
“This is not new,” said Dr Farzana Begum, a faculty member in the Department of History. “Indian Muslims have experienced this before. Whenever we organise peacefully for our rights, whether it is about jobs, education, or justice, suddenly there are unknown people trying to create trouble. And then the trouble is blamed on us.”
Security experts note that infiltrators can be used to shout provocative slogans or create confrontations, which are then recorded and presented as evidence of wrongdoing by the entire movement.
Students say they are aware of this risk and have been actively discouraging outsiders from joining their gatherings. “We are keeping our protests disciplined,” said Najma Parveen, a final-year student in Sociology. “We have volunteers monitoring the crowds. We cannot allow our movement to be hijacked.”
The situation intensified when the Delhi Education Ministry sent a letter to AMU and other central universities warning of possible threats from “sleeper cells” and urging them to improve campus security. The letter also mentioned a “terrorist threat” and the risk of the environment deteriorating.
While the ministry insists the letter was a routine precaution sent to multiple institutions, its timing, during an ongoing protest at AMU, has been seized upon by certain television channels and social media commentators to link the protest with national security concerns.
“This is very damaging,” said an AMU alumnus and journalist, Javed Akhtar. “If you are a Muslim student and you protest against a government policy, suddenly someone will bring up terrorism. It’s a way to silence you.”
The unrest began last month when the AMU administration announced a 30 to 40 per cent hike in fees across most courses. For some professional courses, the increase is even higher.
Students argue that the hike will make higher education inaccessible for thousands, especially those from poor and middle-class Muslim families.
“This university was built to give us a fighting chance in a competitive world,” said Shadab Alam, a first-year engineering student. “My father is a tailor. We can barely pay the current fees. If they increase it by this much, I will have to drop out.”
The protest has also attracted support from political parties. Several Members of Parliament have written to the Vice-Chancellor urging him to withdraw the hike. “This decision goes against the vision of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, who wanted education to be open to all,” one MP wrote in his letter.
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan established the institution with the aim of modernising Muslim education and making it accessible to every capable student, regardless of wealth. His philosophy emphasised knowledge as the foundation for social progress.
“Sir Syed would have been shocked to see this,” said Dr Shoaib Rahman, a retired professor of Urdu. “He wanted this place to be a ladder for the poor, not a wall that keeps them out.”
Students have also invoked Sir Syed’s words in their speeches and posters during the protest, reminding the administration of its original mission.
Observers say the events at AMU are part of a wider pattern in recent years, where protests involving Muslims are quickly framed as anti-national. Examples include the Shaheen Bagh protest against the Citizenship Amendment Act, where women protesters were accused of being “agents of Pakistan,” and the Jamia Millia Islamia demonstrations, where students faced police violence after being linked to “rioters” without proof.
“By using the ‘anti-national’ label, those in power can avoid discussing the real issues,” said human rights lawyer Faizan Ahmad. “It delegitimises the protest in the eyes of the public, especially among people who may already have prejudices against Muslims.”
The allegations have caused anxiety among students about their future prospects. Being associated with an “anti-national” protest can harm a young person’s chances of getting jobs, scholarships, or visas for higher studies abroad.
“This kind of defamation stays on the internet forever,” said Rehan Khan. “Even if it’s false, it will come up when someone searches our names. It’s an attack on our future.”
Parents, too, are worried. “I send my daughter here to study, not to be branded as a criminal,” said Abdul Karim, whose daughter is in her second year at AMU. “These are children. They are asking for affordable education. Why are they being treated like enemies?”
Despite the pressure, students remain defiant. “We will not be intimidated,” said Najma Parveen. “This protest is about justice. If we let them get away with this fee hike, then tomorrow they will make it even harder for poor Muslims to study.”
Some faculty members have joined the students in solidarity. “This is not just a financial issue, it’s a social issue,” said Dr Farzana Begum. “If you cut off access to education, you cut off the future of a whole community.”
The AMU administration has so far defended the fee hike, citing rising operational costs and inflation. However, the growing political and public pressure may force a review of the decision.
For now, the protests continue, with students holding classes in open spaces as a symbolic act to show their commitment to learning despite the financial obstacles.
“The whole world should know that AMU students love their country,” said Mohammad Asif. “We are not the enemies of India. We are the future of India, if they let us study.”
