Released last September, the Centre’s draft Indian Statistical Institute Bill 2025 proposed changes to the governance structure of the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI). (Wikimedia Commons)The Indian Statistical Institute Bill, 2026, was introduced in Lok Sabha on Monday (August 3), almost one year after a draft version made public for feedback drew criticism — including from members of the body it seeks to reform.Released last September, the Centre’s draft Indian Statistical Institute Bill 2025 proposed changes to the governance structure of the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI).Students, faculty members, and staff at the Kolkata campus held a protest against the Bill at the time. Many of them have again urged the Centre not to proceed with the Bill without wider consultations.The ISI in Kolkata was set up by eminent statistician PC Mahalanobis in 1931. It began as a statistical laboratory at Presidency College and was registered as a society, first under the Societies Registration Act of 1860 and later under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act of 1961.In 1959, it was declared an institute of national importance through an Act of Parliament, giving it the power to grant degrees and making it eligible for Central grants and audits. However, it continued as a society.Headquartered in Kolkata with centres in Delhi, Bangalore, Chennai, and Tezpur, the institute offers courses, including those in statistics and mathematics, and has several research divisions.Its highest decision-making body is the 33-member council — including an elected chairman, six representatives of the Centre, and scientists not employed at the institute. Representatives from the Centre include those from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI), the Ministry of Finance, and the Reserve Bank of India.Story continues below this adThe director, the academic and administrative head, is appointed by the council.What changes does the Bill propose?While releasing the draft for feedback, MoSPI said the Bill seeks to elevate the institute’s status and upscale its governance framework by aligning it with peer institutions of national importance. An official FAQ also said that the “large size” of the ISI Council, “excessive internal representation”, and a “large number of elected members” hindered decision-making.Also Read | Why the Indian Statistical Institute must retain its society structureThe Bill provides for the institute to become a ‘statutory body corporate’, an entity established by an Act of Parliament rather than the society it has been so far. It also changes the governance structure, making it more like that of central institutions such as the IITs and IIMs.It proposes that the President of India will be the Visitor. The institute will have a ‘Board of Governance’ comprising a chairperson nominated by the Visitor on the recommendation of the Union government, representatives of the Centre, eminent persons nominated by the Centre, and the director and other institute representatives.Story continues below this adThe board will decide administrative matters, grant degrees, and make appointments to academic and other posts. It is also tasked with making regulations and rules to implement the Act.The Bill provides for an academic council consisting of the heads of divisions and centres and headed by the director, which will make recommendations to the board.The director will be appointed by the board chairperson from a panel recommended by a search-cum-selection committee constituted by the Union government. The Bill gives the Visitor powers to remove the director and order inquiries and reviews of the institute’s work.Once enacted, the Bill will replace the 1959 Act that granted the institute the status of an institution of national importance.What is the opposition to the Bill?Story continues below this adThe primary concern raised by faculty members and students is the Centre’s enhanced control and the potential loss of autonomy. They note that the proposed Board of Governance largely comprises nominees or representatives of the Centre, unlike the existing council, which has broader representation. They have also raised concerns about provisions allowing the Centre a greater role in appointing the director.Several faculty members, students, and researchers have also argued that there were no wider consultations. A petition circulated last year stated: “In the name of upholding integrity in leadership and administration, the Bill lays down a long list of criteria for the removal of a Director from office, while introducing a nominee of MoSPI in the Search-cum-Selection committee.According to the Bill, the Director will be subjected to periodical reviews. All this will essentially turn the Director into an appointee of the Central Government and will be in complete contravention to the notion of autonomy.”