Courtesy The Daily Mirror

Despite legal bans, ragging remains a deeply entrenched, systemic crisis in Sri Lankan universities, fueled by complicity and institutional silence, but a bold intervention proves it can be eradicated

---

Ragging is not merely a matter of seniors bullying juniors. It is a complex, systemic issue involving indoctrination, complicity, and institutional silence

No university administration can genuinely claim ignorance of ragging. The sudden, uniform change in first-year students’ appearance is a public signal that ragging is underway

The success at the Faculty of Applied Science proves that ragging can be eradicated—but only through bold, decisive action. It requires administrators to stop pretending and start protecting

A pervasive and destructive crisis, ragging, continues to plague Sri Lanka’s higher education, often masked as a harmless rite of passage. This abusive practice, extending beyond mere bullying to encompass indoctrination and institutional complicity, has tragically resurfaced with recent student deaths. A former Deputy Proctor exposes the hidden layers of this systemic issue and reveals a radical, effective intervention that successfully broke the cycle of fear and submission at one university.

A deeply entrenched and often overlooked crisis continues to plague Sri Lanka’s higher education system: RAGGING. 

Despite decades of public condemnation and legal prohibition, this abusive practice—often masked as a rite of passage-remains a powerful force in university culture. But ragging is not merely a matter of seniors bullying juniors. It is a complex, systemic issue involving indoctrination, complicity, and institutional silence.

Recent incidents, including the tragic death of a student at Sabaragamuwa University, have once again brought this issue to the forefront of national discourse, exposing the grim reality that unfolds within the hallowed halls of learning.

Drawing from my experience as Deputy Proctor at the Faculty of Applied Science, University of Vavuniya, I aim to shed light on the hidden layers of this crisis and share a radical, yet effective, intervention that helped us break the cycle.

According to a 2022 study conducted by the University Grants Commission (UGC) in collaboration with UNICEF, more than 50% of students in Sri Lankan state universities have experienced some form of ragging. While verbal and psychological harassment were the most commonly reported, instances of physical and even sexual abuse were also noted.

Notably, a more detailed scientific study conducted in July 2022 at the University of Jaffna—specifically within the Faculties of Medicine and Technology—by lead author Ayanthi Wickramasinghe and colleagues from Uppsala University, Sweden, and the University of Jaffna, revealed that 59% of students had experienced emotional and/or verbal ragging. Alarmingly, 54% of the students reported suffering one or more health consequences as a result, with most seeking help from friends and family, while only a few turned to formal support systems.

Institutional silence and Legal Inaction

Sri Lanka’s Prohibition of Ragging Act No. 20 of 1998 criminalizes ragging, although it does not provide a specific legal definition of the term. However, under Section 3 of the Prohibition of Ragging and Other Forms of Violence in Educational Institutions Act, certain actions are explicitly categorized as criminal intimidation. These include threatening, either verbally or in writing, to cause harm to the person, reputation, or property of a student or staff member of an educational institution—or to someone closely associated with them. Such threats are considered criminal when made with the intention of imposing fear in the victim, compelling them to perform an act they are not legally obligated to do, or preventing them from exercising a legal right.

Yet, enforcement remains weak. One of the most troubling aspects is the silent complicity of university administrations. As I have often said, no university administration can genuinely claim ignorance of ragging. The sudden, uniform change in first-year students’ appearance is a public signal that ragging is underway.

This includes boys who wear untucked and un-ironed shirts, no belts, slippers instead of shoes, shaved heads, or who suddenly appear clean-shaven. Girls often shift to plain, light-coloured tops and long frocks, wear double plaits, avoid fancy earrings or hair clips, and forgo any form of fancy footwear—often walking in single or double file. These are unmistakable signs of submission, especially when seniors themselves do not follow such practices. Yet, when questioned, juniors consistently claim they are doing it of their own free will.

This uniformity is not about tradition—it is a tool of domination, rooted in a distorted notion of social equality.” The idea promoted is that within the university community, there should be no distinction between rich or poor, talented or average—everyone must appear and behave the same. This ideology extends into academics as well, where individuality and educational strengths are suppressed in the name of conformity.

First-year students are often burdened with unnecessary tasks, such as memorizing the personal details of their batchmates. These activities, disguised as bonding exercises, consume valuable time and mental energy, especially during the critical first month of academic life. As a result, students are unable to focus effectively on their studies.

This forced uniformity strips students of their identity and marks them as subordinates. Those who conform quickly often become enforcers themselves, isolating and pressuring peers who resist. Students who do not adhere to these expectations are often singled out and become targets of more severe forms of ragging. In many cases, boys who are identified as non-compliant are physically assaulted—often at night, in the dark, by groups of seniors to avoid identification.

Another important and often overlooked aspect of this indoctrination is the restriction placed on language and communication. First-year students are strictly instructed not to speak in English. They are also discouraged from asking questions in class or approaching lecturers for academic help. Instead, they are told to direct all queries to their seniors. This deliberate isolation from academic support systems severely damages the lecturer-student relationship and undermines the students’ confidence and academic progress. Based on my observations, at least 25% of students fail due to poor English proficiency—an issue that is exacerbated by this early discouragement. The initial months, which should be a time of academic adjustment and growth, become an excuse to ignore English and avoid engaging with the curriculum meaningfully.

This is how ragging escalates—from subtle psychological control to overt physical abuse,leaving lasting scars on its victims and perpetuating a toxic cycle of fear, silence, and submission.

Despite these visible indicators, many administrators and academics choose to look the other way. Victims, meanwhile, protect their abusers—either out of fear or indoctrination—making legal action nearly impossible.

A lecturer from Southeastern University once shared a rather disgusting example. A group of first-year students were seen eating lunch in the canteen by pooling all their food onto a single tabletop. When asked about it, they insisted they were doing it voluntarily and enjoying the experience. While this is a clear example of ragging, the fact that the juniors claimed it was their own choice made it legally and administratively impossible to intervene.

During my tenure as the Deputy Proctor, some students, anonymously and courageously, passed me information about instructions they were receiving from unknown phone numbers. I approached the Poovarasankulam Police and the Vavuniya SP Office through the university administration to trace these numbers. Unfortunately, I received no support. Instead, the police advised me to ask the students to go to court to obtain the information—an unrealistic expectation, as no student or parent was willing to take that risk. This legal gap gave seniors a safe channel to continue issuing instructions via phone and WhatsApp from falsely created numbers.

This illustrates a critical flaw in enforcement: when victims internalize and normalize abuse. Ragging hides in plain sight—shielded by silence, fear, and a false sense of consent.

Breaking the cycle at Vavuniya

When I assumed the role of Deputy Proctor in 2020, I was fully aware that traditional approaches would be ineffective. I gave clear and direct instructions to the first-year students, explaining what they might face and how senior students would attempt to impose their own rules and expectations. I also firmly warned them that if I discovered they were complying with such instructions, I would take strict disciplinary action. Despite these warnings, the juniors still arrived dressed according to the seniors’ enforced style. It was evident that the cycle of ragging had begun once again.

I took a bold step: I banned classes for students who visibly complied with ragging instructions. These juniors were not just victims—they were becoming promoters of ragging, ready to carry it forward to the next batch. Therefore, I believed that preventing them from entering classes was a valid and necessary disciplinary measure.

Fortunately, I had the full support of the Dean of the Faculty, who gave me a free hand to implement the necessary changes. The academic staff of the faculty also stood firmly behind me. With their backing, I was able to identify and take action against junior students who were carrying out orders from seniors.

Despite challenges, our efforts paid off. For last three years, the Faculty of Applied Science is free of ragging. There is no visible difference in dress or grooming between juniors and seniors. Female students are free to wear what they wish—including makeup—without fear of revenge or exclusion.

One of the sneakiest tools of control is the so-called Welcome” party. In many universities, this event is organized by second-year students for the first-years. But in reality, it is used as leverage: juniors are told that unless they comply with ragging, they will be excluded from the event.

At the Faculty of Applied Science, we took a firm and proactive stance. We do not permit the organization of a Welcome” party in its traditional, intimidating form. Instead, we encourage a gathering hosted by the second-year students, where all students are invited to participate equally and are encouraged to showcase their talents in a spirit of inclusivity and celebration.

We have made it clear that no student can be barred from taking part in this event under any circumstances. As academic staff, we remain highly vigilant to ensure that no first-year student is left behind. Even if one student is ostracized or excluded, the program is not allowed to proceed. This policy has helped transform what was once a tool of control into a platform for unity, creativity, and mutual respect.

This transformation is evident in our recent Faculty Sports Week, where several first-year students won first-place prizes—beating their seniors in open competition. This would have been unthinkable in a ragging-dominated environment.

The success at the Faculty of Applied Science proves that ragging can be eradicated—but only through bold, decisive action. It requires administrators to stop pretending and start protecting. It requires holding not just the perpetrators, but also the enablers, accountable.

Most importantly, it requires empowering students to reclaim their autonomy and dignity. Ragging is not a tradition—it is a violation. And it is time we treat it as such.

There is no point in merely holding a policy of zero ragging—it must be implemented with a genuine, sustained approach. Continuous monitoring and vigilance are essential. If all academic staff commit to this cause, the ragging culture can be completely eliminated from our universities.

Universities are meant to be spaces of freedom—of thought, expression, and speech. Ironically, this very freedom is often suppressed by groups of students who claim to act in the name of protecting that freedom for others—an oxymoron in itself.

Following the tragic death of a student at Sabaragamuwa University and the disturbing incident at the South Eastern University of Sri Lanka, the issue of ragging has once again come to the forefront. These events echo the heartbreaking case of Rupa Rathnaseeli in 1974 and the tragic death of S. Varapragash in 1997, which first brought national attention to the brutality of ragging.

It is imperative that authorities take firm and immediate action to eradicate ragging from Sri Lankan universities. We cannot afford to wait for another tragedy to occur, only to see yet another article published twenty years later highlighting the same failures. This cycle of inaction must end—now.

The writer is Former Deputy Proctor,

Faculty of Applied Science, University of Vavuniya (2020–2022)