Reply to [The Lack of Accountability within the NTA] [The Hindu]

I apologize in advance for the undeserving promotion I am going to be giving the article attached below.

I read this Op-Ed in The Hindu today, and I find myself compelled to point out some glaring flaws. It is an ill-researched, and superficial.

At the outset I must say that, although the author and I stand together in our protest against the NEET paper-leak, and the failure of the NTA I would refuse to approve the arguments in this piece even if a gun were placed to my head.

I have written previously in The Quint on why the Telegram Ban for conducting NEET is illegal. I have written two extensive posts on this very platform on the NEET paper-leak.

My friend in the Op-Ed argues that since the NTA is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 there is no liability “towards the candidates it examines”. My friend then calls for a “codified liability standard”, without taking the pains to elaborate its meaning.

Bringing an Act for NTA will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The NTA already has a manual which indicates its functioning, powers, and structure. This is enough accountability for a body conducting exams. Should we follow my friend’s advice we would find ourselves making an Act for NCERT, ICMR, NSD, and a plethora of Bodies.

The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) has its share of flaws. I have written about them here.

My friend argues that this Act provides only a “prosecutorial instrument” to deal with paper leaks. He suggests that there should be compensation for candidates who appeared in the exam fairly. There should also be liability on the examining body.

Why should there be compensation? If following the leak – admissions have been halted and a re-examination is conducted, I believe this is the best way to restitute harm caused to candidates from the paper leak. In fact, money/compensation would only be an eyewash. Similarly, what is meant by holding NTA liable? Of course, it is liable – after all, it has conducted the examination. What we need is a more robust mechanism for NEET.

While we criticize, let us remain selective of the arguments we adopt. Let us unite to fix this system, but by placing reliance on well thought/well reasoned arguments, not hollow rhetoric.

I hope my comments reach The Hindu Such articles only weaken our fight for justice.