Fixing what’s broken in KP universities

Universities across Pakistan, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), face significant governance and financial challenges. In the hapless KP alone, out of 34 universities, 24 have been operating without regular vice-chancellors for long, while 21 seats of learning do not have pro-vice-chancellors.

Additionally, 33 universities are without full-time registrars, 32 lack treasurers, 30 do not have controllers of examinations, and 25 have no auditors. Approximately 6,000 teaching staff members serve in universities across the province. Still, they lack motivation due to being stuck in the same cadre for decades, as there is no career progression policy in place for them. According to a report from the governor’s secretariat of KP, 20 universities are currently facing budget deficits, while others are at risk of experiencing deficits in the coming years.

The Higher Education Department of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa highlights major governance and administrative challenges in public-sector universities, including a power divide between the provincial government and the governor, who serves as a ceremonial chancellor. Many universities suffer from a shortage of essential staff, such as registrars and vice-chancellors. This affects their overall efficiency.

Now the PTI-led provincial government has come up with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Universities (Amendment) Act, 2024. The amendments include empowering the chief minister as chancellor, streamlining appointments, filling vacant positions and addressing governance gaps.

Key amendments to the KP Universities Act include several significant changes. The chief minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa will replace the governor as the chancellor of universities, and the vice-chancellor's term will be extended from three years to four. The registrar's position, previously a regular appointment by the Syndicate, will now be a tenure-based role for three years, with the chancellor as the appointing authority. Additionally, the chancellor may appoint a civil servant from the administrative cadre as registrar.

A government auditor for pre-audit will be appointed through transfer by the finance department. The number of deans in the Syndicate will be reduced to one, while faculty representation will decrease from four to two, and the chairmen's representative will be removed. Furthermore, Senate ratification will be required for decisions made by the Syndicate through a majority vote.

Various teachers' associations, including FAPUASA (KP Chapter), the Teaching Staff Associations of Peshawar University, Islamia College University, Kohat University, Malakand University, Hazara University, and others, have strongly opposed the proposed amendments to the KP Universities Act. They argue that these changes threaten academic autonomy and promote bureaucratic interference, undermining universities’ independence as institutions of learning and research.

The associations have also criticised the provincial government for failing to establish a provincial Higher Education Commission (HEC) or provide adequate funding for higher education. In contrast to investments made by Sindh, Punjab, and Balochistan, this lack of support has destabilised university structures, increased tuition fees, and restricted access to higher education for students, despite three consecutive PTI-led terms in the province.

A comprehensive review of these amendments is essential to assess whether they will bring meaningful improvements. Replacing the governor with the chief minister of KP as the chancellor is likely to further politicise the already fragile state of universities. It will be nearly impossible for the chief minister to preside over Senate meetings effectively. If the Senate meets twice a year, the chief minister will need to attend 68 meetings annually, averaging five meetings per month or roughly one meeting every week.

Extending the vice-chancellor’s term seems like a positive decision, and conducting a midterm performance review could further enhance the quality of leadership. Similarly, converting the registrar's position into a tenure-based role is a commendable step. Currently, 31 universities are without regularly appointed registrars, and this amendment will facilitate filling these positions. However, the assumption that appointing a civil servant from the administrative cadre as registrar will improve university affairs is debatable.

Administrative officers are already managing various departments across the province, and the performance of these departments is not different from the performance of the universities. Furthermore, granting the chief minister authority to appoint or post registrars will likely deepen the politicisation of university administration. Until now, the registrar’s position has been considered non-political, but this amendment risks turning it into a politically influenced role.

The appointment of a government auditor is often seen as an infringement on university autonomy, but I believe it is a positive move. However, it remains uncertain whether the appointment of a government auditor will effectively resolve the universities’ financial challenges. With the KP government’s total debt standing at approximately Rs1.8 trillion, one must question why, if the finance department is capable of improving university financial management, the provincial government has accumulated such a significant debt.

The decision to reduce the number of internal university members seems to prioritise decision-making based on adherence to established rules rather than relying on a majority vote. On the other hand, the government is represented in the syndicate by the secretaries of establishment, finance, higher education, and administrative departments, along with the chancellor’s nominee and the Higher Education Commission's nominee.

Given their presence, it raises the question of how many syndicate decisions are made based on majority vote yet fail to align with the rules, and whether these government representatives have formally expressed their dissent on such decisions.

Finally, the requirement for Senate ratification of Syndicate decisions made through a majority vote could slow progress. A single dissenting opinion has the potential to delay the implementation of decisions for extended periods, adding further administrative hurdles.

Time will reveal the true impact of these amendments. Every stakeholder – government, vice-chancellors, associations, academia, and society – is collectively responsible for the current challenges. The government is unable to appoint vice-chancellors on time, while many vice-chancellors hesitate to fill key positions, fearing it may diminish their authority.

Associations remain preoccupied with securing their own rights but focus less on their duties while most faculty members act as passive spectators. Similarly, civil society shows little interest in matters of national importance. To address these issues, all stakeholders must engage in self-reflection, acknowledge their own shortcomings, and take responsibility, rather than shift blame to others.

The writer is an associate professor of computer science and president of the All Public Universities BPS Teachers’ Association (APUBTA).

He can be reached at: srahman@uom.edu.pk