The selective secularism of dhaka university

Published on: July 26, 2026

Dhaka University has entered its 105th year since its establishment, standing as the country’s oldest and most prominent higher education institution with a rich history. As a public institution funded by the government and following the admission test policy it has, each year students from diverse background get admitted in here. The coexistance and the diversity in terms of ethnicity, gender, religion and other clusters has been one of the finest practice for years. For years, this university has gone through several phases of continuous progression, not only infrastructurally, but also ideologically. An institution in a Muslim-majority country, it has upheld its secular identity since the beginning, marking Leela Nag, a Hindu student, as the first female student to get admitted to this university. 

With time, the university continued to foster an environment welcoming to both men and women. Dhaka University, consisting of five female and thirteen male dormitories, has nevertheless maintained a functional co-educational practice for years. For a century, the students, regardless of their religious and gender identity, have shared the classrooms and the campus with equal rights, and in case of any discrimination, the students have always been vocal about issues. The discriminatory regulation of closing the female dormitories at 10 PM, while the male dorms remain open all night, has  always been a critical discussion. Since the DUCSU election of 2019, such tight restrictions have been loosened a little, yet the regulations still exist, and debates over such inquiry often raise concern about women's rights within the campus. In addition to that, seperate setting in the university bus also triggered discourses on such discriminatory policies. Due to the unwillingness of the administration, such demands have never seen a promising outcome till this date.

A new anomaly has been observed for the past few years. In recent times, a particular bubble of its stakeholders has raised concerns regarding the female students who prefer to keep their religious attire within the campus premises and prefer to wear hijabs and niqabs. This debate has intensified following several disturbing incidents: female students being ejected from viva boards, facing verbal harassment within classrooms from their teachers, and most recently, opposing the establishment of a dedicated female zone at the TSC cafeteria, a space intended for students who prefer privacy due to religious beliefs and mothers needing a private area for breastfeeding, as per the claim by the Common-room and Cafeteria Secretary of DUCSU, who is responsible behind this establishment.

This dispute highlights a glaring double standard. Dhaka University has a long history of successful secular practices. Over a century after its founding, the university still maintains a dedicated residential hall for non-Muslim students named Jagannath Hall. In addition to that, the Faculty of Fine Arts maintains a strict policy against serving beef in its canteen out of respect for Hindu traditions, even though the majority of its students are Muslim. As a secular institution, Dhaka University has traditionally allowed students from all religious backgrounds to pursue their education without compromising their religious beliefs at any point, ensuring a protective environment for religious minorities. Yet, recent incidents raise a critical question: is the secularism practiced at Dhaka University truly for everyone, or is it reserved exclusively for specific groups?

However, the opponents have some valid points to make. When it comes to identity verification, wearing a niqab can present operational challenges. Because facial verification is mandatory during viva boards, a candidate's refusal to reveal their face may raise concerns regarding procedural transparency and integrity. Additionally, establishing a separate female zone in a common space, such as TSC, seems unnecessary to them. Such arguments are reasonable, but not entirely bulletproof. As the largest university of the country and considering the bulk amount of goverment fund each year it gets, the departments can simply arrange biometric identification for female students who are attending the annual viva voce wearning niqabs, or at least a dedicated female faculty member can be placed on the viva boards for manual facial identification. Also, having common rooms in multiple faculties and departments is already in practice at this university; thus, debating the exact placement of a zone at the TSC cafeteria is reasonable, but dismissed claims against its mere existence ignore established campus practice.

In the last few years, criticisms have been raised frequently that females who wear hijabs and niqabs do not belong in a co-educational setting. However, such critics do not necessarily represent the majority of the students' voices. As per the result of the DUCSU election in 2025, which was considerably a fair one compared to the 2019 election, the far-right student political wings have secured a landslide victory, winning almost the full panel with record votes. Such results demand critical insight and dissection. From my experience as a former Dhaka University student, right-wing platforms successfully capitalized on this deep-seated alieanation, rallying students who felt alienated by years of bullying over their religious attire under the guise of liberalism. Following recent social media debates over the separate female zone at TSC, student voting patterns in the next DUCSU election could be noticeably impacted. Consequently, right-wing platforms stand a high chance of securing a major portion of the votes once again. Because the females who prefer to stay private probably do not engage much on social media, but they surely vote.

The philosophy of a higher education institution should focus steadfastly on academic and personal development. The freedom of choice for all students must be restored and upheld, provided it causes no harm to others. Basic privacy rights are the bare minimum a university student can expect, especially when directly tied to personal religious conviction. Protecting these rights is a collective responsibility, which that requires genuine respect from others rather than dismissal or ridicule.