The Debate Society and Model United Nations Society in collaboration with the Public Policy Committee had successfully conducted their 2nd Edition of the Intra-College Debate Competition 2025, which was a 3-day event that took place on the 16th, 17th and 18th of September 2025.

This competition had a total of 64 registered teams, each team consisting of 2 speakers where students from different classes and years were welcome to form teams and participate. Each round of the event had carefully handpicked motions that carry relevance in the present day.

Day 1: Prelims (16th September 2025)
The 1st day of the Intra College Debate Competition 2025, the Prelims , took place on 16th September 2025. The Prelims had 3 rounds wherein all 64 teams divided into 32 teams would compete against, while standing for and against the motions allotted to them. A series of debates were conducted over three rounds, providing a dynamic platform for participants to engage in critical discussions on contemporary social, technological, and policy-related issues. Each round witnessed enthusiastic participation, with speakers presenting well-researched arguments, rebuttals, and thought-provoking perspectives. The debates encouraged analytical thinking, persuasive communication, and respectful exchange of diverse viewpoints, creating an intellectually stimulating environment for both participants and the audience. These rounds were presided over by our own faculty and alumni.

1 This House takes note of the growing use of Generative AI among Undergraduate Students, its increasing normalisation by authorities, and calls for a Ban of Generative AI in academic pedagogy.
This House condemns the Exploitative Nature of the Illegal Sex work Industry and calls for reform through Legislation and Regulation.
This House calls for the Implementation of a Universal Healthcare Scheme to cover every Medical condition of every Indian citizen.

Day 2: Knockout Rounds (17th September 2025)
On Day 2 of the Competition, Knockout Rounds were conducted. These were divided into 2 rounds, the Quarters and Semi-Finals.

The similar procedure was applied as that of the previous round. Each round had its own topic.

Quarter Finals
The Quarter Finals began with an intense series of debates surrounding the motion “This House condemns the Boom in Unregulated Private Investments, leading to the Concentration of Wealth in the Hands of a Few, and Calls for the Imposition of a Billionaire Tax.”

The Top 8 Teams contested and argued with intense grit and rigor with the aim to ensure their argument was mostly impactful. While arguing for the motion, the participants argued that the rapid rise of unchecked private investments had exacerbated economic inequality, enabling a small section of society to accumulate disproportionate wealth. They stated that implementing a billionaire tax would help redistribute resources, strengthen public welfare schemes, and promote a fairer economic structure.

On the other hand, the participation against the motion contended that such a tax could discourage investment, hamper innovation, and potentially drive capital out of the country. They maintained that rather than imposing punitive taxes, the focus should be on creating transparent regulatory mechanisms and encouraging inclusive growth.

Both sides presented strong economic and ethical arguments, making it one of the most thought-provoking rounds of the competition.

This round of the Knockouts was judged by esteemed panel of judges who were namely, Ms. Nohosanu Natalia Rhutso, Ms. Noyingbeni Odyuo, Ms. Neha Gaikwad, Mr. Meghan Kadam, Mr. Imlingangzuk Longkumer, Ms. Hafsa Fathima, Mr. Rakesh Mochahary and Ms. Pratiksha Rai. This esteemed panel consisted of individuals from well accomplished and achieved academic backgrounds and they, while presiding over this round, gave their insights regarding the motions, thus helping the participants learn as well.

Post the Quarters, the judges were then felicitated by our Faculty Coordinators, Asst. Professors Mr. Edwin Joney, Ms. Akshatha Niranjana and Ms. Ayman Naveed. Following the felicitation ceremony, the results of the Quarters were announced and the Top 4 Teams advanced to the next round - the Semi-Finals.

Semi-Finals
The Round of the Semi-Finals, that took place in the Admin Block, saw a compelling debate on the motion, “This House calls for More Inclusive Definitions of Rape and Sexual Harassment that Acknowledge Male Victims of these offences.”

This round was presided over and judged by Ms. Noyingbeni Odyuo, Mr. Imlingangzuk Longkumer, Mr. Meghan Kadam and Ms. Nohosanu Natalia Rhutso.

The team in favour of the motion made a strong case for gender-neutral legal definitions, highlighting how existing laws often fail to recognise male survivors and calling for equal protection for all. The opposition acknowledged the importance of inclusivity but raised concerns about the practical challenges of implementation and the potential for misuse. The discussion was insightful and sensitive, with participants handling the topic with both maturity and depth, making it one of the most impactful rounds of the tournament.

Following this, the committee after evaluation of the scores, made the much-anticipated announcement, the Top 2 Teams, thus setting the stage for the Grand Finale.

Day 3: Grand Finale (18th September 2025)
The much-awaited event of the Intra-College Debate Competition was here - The Grand Finale.

The event took place in the SJCL Auditorium and it began with the emcees of the day, Ms. Yuktha and Ms. Nehal of the Debate Society. A beautiful and captivating performance was given by the Choir team of the Cultural Committee named ‘Habeas Chorus.’ Following which the Inaugural ceremony was conducted, in the presence of the Director, Fr. Jerald D’Souza, SJ; Principal, Dr. Pauline Priya; Vice Principal, Ms. Shobha Hegde; the Finance Officer, Fr. Harry Terry, SJ and our esteemed Judge for the Day, Ms. C K Meena, along with the Faculty Coordinators and the Student Coordinators of the Debate Society, Model United Nations Society and the Public Policy Committee

The gathering was then addressed by the Director and then addressed by the Guest of Honor, Ms. CK Meena, who expressed her admiration for the participants, noting that the debates had showcased exceptional critical thinking, confidence, and intellectual rigour. She remarked that platforms like these not only encourage healthy discourse but also play a vital role in shaping articulate and informed young leaders. She encouraged the finalists to approach the round with grace, respect, and a spirit of learning, reminding them that true victory lies in the exchange of ideas rather than in the outcome alone. She concluded by wishing all teams the very best for the finale. Finally, the event was addressed by the Faculty Coordinator, Mr. Edwin Joney, who brought out the importance and relevance of such a topic like language which has been debated for sometime and wished the very best to the participating student while also giving his thanks to the Guest of Honor.

The debate then commenced with the set motion:

“This House, concerned with the growing Regionalist and Secessionist Tendencies, calls for Implementing Hindi and English as the Uniform Official Languages across All Cosmopolitan Cities in India.”

The final round of the competition was more fierce and tough as both the teams made many thought-provoking and effective arguments.

The team in Affirmation of the motion, Team Code 23, asserted that a common linguistic framework would foster national unity, reduce administrative complexities, and create a more inclusive environment for citizens migrating from different states. The speakers also argued that Hindi and English, being widely spoken, could serve as effective bridges for communication, thereby strengthening social and cultural cohesion in rapidly growing urban centres. Their arguments were delivered with clarity and conviction, setting a strong tone for the final debate.

The team in Opposition to the motion, Team Code 54, presented a well-reasoned critique of the motion, cautioning against the imposition of uniform languages across cosmopolitan cities. They argued that such a policy could undermine India’s rich linguistic diversity and alienate regional communities whose languages form an integral part of their cultural identity. The speakers highlighted that enforcing Hindi and English uniformly might intensify regional tensions rather than ease them, potentially deepening the very secessionist tendencies the motion aimed to address. They advocated instead for policies that promote multilingualism and inclusivity, ensuring that linguistic diversity is seen as a strength rather than a challenge.

After presenting their arguments, the teams then proceeded with the Rebuttal session which was an engaging and dynamic edge to the debate. The proposition argued that promoting Hindi and English as uniform official languages, would not erase regional identities but provide a common platform alongside local languages, questioning if prioritising regional languages might hinder national integration. The opposition countered that imposing two languages could marginalise regional speakers and may not be practical in India’s linguistic diversity, citing past instances where language imposition led to social unrest.

To make things more interesting, The audience actively participated by posing thought-provoking questions to both sides. The proposition was asked how their proposal would safeguard linguistic rights and prevent cultural homogenisation. The opposition faced questions on the feasibility of maintaining administrative efficiency with multiple official languages and how their alternative approach would address growing regional divides. These exchanges enriched the discussion, making the finals both intellectually stimulating and interactive.

Ultimately, after a brief moment taken by the Judge to allot the scores, the results for the Finale were announced and the Vote of Thanks was delivered by the Faculty Coordinator of the Public Policy Committee, Ms Akshatha Niranjana

The Winning Team of this year’s Intra-College Debate Competition 2025 is Team 54, formed by Alexander S and Naveka D.

The Award for Best Speaker was given to Alexander S from the Winner’s Team.

The Runner-Up Team for this year’s Intra-College Debate Competition 2025 was Team 23, formed by Lillian and Thanvi.

An Honourable Mention for making the Most Feasible Argument was given to the Team Code 12, constituted by Mansi Gupta and Soha Gaurav.