The

Debating Society
of DITU
“Making Stage Fear A Myth”

The Debating Society of DIT University stands as a thriving community of thinkers,

speakers, and changemakers. Established in 2018, the society was created with a singular
vision — to create a space where voices are not just heard, but refined, where the art of
reasoned argument and the power of expression is nurtured. Over the years, it has grown
into a hallmark of intellectual pursuit on campus, offering students a platform to engage,
debate, and evolve — both as speakers and as individuals.

Resonating with our motto “Making Stage Fear a Myth”, we seek to dismantle the barriers
that silence voices. We believe that the stage is not merely a platform, but a proving
ground — one where fear is conquered, confidence is built, and words are wielded with
precision and grace. At the heart of DebSoc lie three guiding principles: Satya (Truth),
Gyan (Knowledge) and Shaurya (Courage). These words are not just ideals but the
foundation upon which we shape our journey as debaters and thinkers. In every debate,
we strive for intellectual honesty or Satya. Whether arguing for or against a motion, we
commit to a reasoned discourse, ensuring that facts and ethics remain at the core of our
arguments. We believe that a strong debater is, first and foremost, an informed one
representing Gyan. Questioning, learning, and evolving—this is how knowledge becomes
power. But debate is not just about speaking. It demands the Courage or Shaurya to
challenge ideas. At the Society, bold voices rise—ones that stand for what is right and
fearlessly question the status quo. Whether on the debate stage or in life, our members
carry forward the values of Satya, Gyan, and Shaurya, shaping a future where informed
voices lead meaningful conversations.

Beyond the competitions and accolades, it is a space that cultivates critical thinking,
empathy, and the courage to question. It shapes individuals who not only excel in oratory
but grow into thoughtful, responsible voices of society - ready to lead conversations that
matter.

1
 Illumination From
The Faculty Advisor
Greetings,

It is my pleasure to welcome you all to the Debating Society of DIT University—a space where
ideas thrive, perspectives expand, and voices gain strength. With great anticipation and
excitement, I am honored to officially announce the third edition of our esteemed All English
Inter-University Debate Competition, Clash of Certitude 3.0.

Our flagship event, Clash of Certitude, is more than just a debate; it is a platform for intellectual
challenges and personal growth. Here, you will refine your reasoning, sharpen your articulation,
and develop the confidence to express your ideas with clarity and conviction. This event
embodies the philosophy that true wisdom is not about having all the answers but about asking
the right questions.

Through debates, workshops, and discussions, our society nurtures individuals who think
critically, argue persuasively, and lead with confidence. Whether you win or not, true success
lies in the knowledge you gain and the perspectives you embrace.

I encourage each of you to engage with passion, listen with an open mind, and most importantly,
enjoy the journey of intellectual discovery. Let us continue to foster a culture where every voice
matters, every argument is heard, and every debate sparks the flame of wisdom.

Best regards,
Dr. Santosh Singh
Assistant Professor, SoLAM
Faculty Advisor
The Debating Society
DIT University

2
 The Driving Force:
Convenors' Note
“Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent, and debate.”

Dear Trailblazers,

The Debating Society of DIT University is more than just a club—it is a citadel of
discourse, a sanctuary where intellect meets conviction, and where ideas find their
sharpest expression. Here, debate is not a contest of egos but a crucible of thought,
where perspectives are tested, sharpened, and refined. Over the years, we have built a
legacy of excellence, with our members standing tall on national platforms, not just as
debaters, but as thinkers, leaders, and torchbearers of rational discourse.

Beyond accolades and victories, our true triumph lies in the evolution of voices—where
hesitant whispers become bold declarations and minds learn to challenge the norm
fearlessly. Debate is more than the art of persuasion; it is the cornerstone of leadership,
the driving force of progress, and the backbone of democracy. In our community, we
don’t just nurture orators—we empower individuals to question, reason, and reshape the
world with their words, Making Stage Fear a Myth.

As convenors, we welcome you to this extraordinary journey. Within these walls, you will
find not just a stage but a legacy—one that awaits your voice, your passion, and your
indelible mark. With the highest regard, we invite you to be a part of the third edition of
Clash of Certitude 3.0. After two successful years, we are ready to elevate the spirit of
debate once again. Join us as we create a legacy of voices, ideas, and fearless discourse.

Mr. Ankit Karmakar Ms. Tanuja Baluni

President Governor
The Debating Society The Debating Society
DIT University DIT University
Convenors
Clash Of Certitude ‘25

3
 About
CLASH OF CERTITUDE
Some events fade with time. Others etch themselves into history. Clash of Certitude is
not just a debate, it is a tradition, a legacy, a proving ground for those who dare to
challenge the status quo.

With Shree Naveen Aggarwal Ji Memorial National Debate Competition, it all began
during the lockdown, when we hosted our first National Debate Championship. Though
it laid the foundation for something greater, it was yet to be named. The following year,
we introduced Clash of Certitude, giving our legacy a new name and identity. Since then,
we have successfully conducted two editions under this banner, and now, with immense
pride, we present the third edition, continuing the tradition of insightful discourse and
intellectual engagement.

Organized by the Debating Society of DIT University, Clash of Certitude is a forum for
the most passionate debaters across the nation. Born in the silence of lockdown yet
roaring into the national spotlight, this event was never meant to be just another
competition. It was conceived as a legacy—a tradition of dialectical mastery, ideological
combat, and the relentless pursuit of truth. Inspired by the vision of Shree Naveen
Aggarwal Ji, what began as an audacious experiment has now ascended to a grand
intellectual odyssey. With esteemed recognition, coveted trophies, and the opportunity
to inscribe one’s name into the annals of debating excellence, Clash of Certitude is more
than a tournament—it is a journey of resilience, knowledge, and the relentless pursuit of
truth.
But beyond the clash of perspectives and the pursuit of victory, this event embodies a
greater ideal—the preservation of intellectual legacy. It is where debaters, year after
year, uphold the highest traditions of rigor, research, and rhetorical prowess. It is where
the echoes of past champions meet the voices of new challengers, ensuring that the
tradition of debate never fades but evolves, refines, and ascends.

When the final verdict echoes through the halls—whether in favor of the affirmative or
the opposition—the applause resounds not just as recognition of victory, but as a
testament to the unwavering spirit of debate and the pursuit of truth.

4
 Progression Of The Debate
1. Each university will have 4 participants forming 2 internal teams, one will
speak for the motion and other against the motion.
2. A random draw will be conducted to select the rebuttal team for each debating
team that takes the stage.
3. Debating team’s first speaker will deliver the opening statement for 2.5
minutes.
4. Then first speaker will be rebutted by the first rebuttal speaker for 2.5 minutes
and cross questioning is allowed in rebuttal rounds.
5. The second speaker will continue the motion for 2.5 minutes for closing the
motion, ensuring a progression in perspectives.
6. The second speaker of the rebuttal team will rebut the second speaker for 2.5
minutes, continuing the line of argumentation.
7. Both speakers must present distinct yet complementary perspectives,
duplication of points is not permitted.
8. Pooled marking will be done i.e. marks lost by one team in the rebuttal round
will be awarded to the opposing team.
9. Communication Rule: During the debating team’s speeches, the rebuttal team
may communicate amongst themselves. However, during the 2.5 minutes
rebuttal round, no communication is permitted between teammates. Any
attempt to communicate during this time will result in negative marking.
10. Questions posed by the rebuttal team, must not exceed 15 seconds.
11. If any team violates the rules, the opposing team may raise a POO. Grounds
for a POO include overly long questions (beyond 15 seconds), rebutting team
communicating during the round, or both speakers presenting the same
perspective.

5
 The Ground Rules

1. To ensure a smooth start, participants are requested to arrive by 8:00 AM for

registration and must carry their physical college ID cards for verification at the
venue.

2. As per the itinerary, the event will commence at 9:00 AM sharp. Participants are
required to arrive at the committee hall 10 minutes prior to their allotted time.

3. Participants are requested to wear proper formal attire (e.g., suits, dresses, etc.).
University uniforms are not allowed to maintain anonymity.

4. No gadgets, notes or items may be brought to the podium. Violation of this rule
will result in immediate disqualification.

5. Participants are required to fill out one form per team (2 members), with a non-
refundable fee of INR 1000/- per team to be paid via UPI/phone number/QR code
provided in the link. The payment screenshot must be attached to the form. Only
limited changes will be allowed after submission.

6. The judges’ decisions are final and cannot be contested. The Organizing
Committee (OC) reserves the right to interpret the results.

7. The use of any unparliamentary language or personal remarks will lead to

negative marking or disqualification.

6
 Debate in Motion:
A Glimpse into the Format Add a subheading

Add a subheading

Mock Debate Script:

Motion: "Developed nations must bear the greatest responsibility in combating climate
change."

Team Structure

Debating Team - For the Motion [University 1]

Rebuttal Team - Against the Motion [University 2]

1. Speaker 1 - Debating Team (For the Motion)

[2.5 minutes] Speech
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Climate change is not just a scientific issue; it's a
matter of justice. Developed countries have built their economies over centuries using
fossil fuels. Now, they ask the rest of the world to go green-without acknowledging the
damage they've already caused.
That's not fair!
Point 1:
Let's talk numbers. The United States alone is responsible for almost a quarter of
historical carbon emissions. When you add Europe, the historical contribution is
overwhelming. This isn't about blame; it's about responsibility. They've used up more
than their fair share of the global carbon budget.
Point 2:
Developed countries have the tools - money, innovation, infrastructure. They can shift
to clean energy faster, fund green tech, and support global solutions. If they don't lead
the way, who will?

2. Rebuttal Round 1 - Rebuttal Team (Against the Motion)

First Rebuttal Member - 2.5 mins

7
 Debate in Motion:
A Glimpse into the Format Add a subheading

Add a subheading

Cross-questioning segment:
Q1: Isn't it unfair to expect developing countries to act without similar accountability
from developed ones?
A1 (Speaker 1): We aren't saying developing nations shouldn't act. But fairness means
those who caused the mess and have more resources must clean up more.

Q2: China is the biggest emitter today. Shouldn't they take more responsibility now?
A2 (Speaker 1): Absolutely, but China became a major emitter much later. Developed
nations had a 100-year head start and must acknowledge that.

Q3: What if developed countries don't act despite their capability? How do you ensure
accountability then?
A3 (Speaker 1): That would need global pressure and diplomacy...though honestly, I don't
have a concrete mechanism beyond that.

3. Speaker 2 - Debating Team (For the Motion)

[2.5 minutes] Speech
Picking up from my teammate - let's clarify: we're not suggesting that developing
countries sit back. But fairness matters. Developed countries got rich by polluting. Now
they want poorer nations to grow clean, but without help. That's not leadership, that's
hypocrisy.
Point 3:
Developing countries are still fighting poverty. If we expect them to bear equal
responsibility without support, we're setting them up to fail. That's not climate justice.
Point 4:
Look at the Paris Agreement-"common but differentiated responsibilities." This isn't just
our opinion; it's international consensus. Developed nations are meant to take the lead
and help others follow.

8
 Debate in Motion:
A Glimpse into the Format Add a subheading

Add a subheading

Response to Rebuttal 3:
My teammate was asked how we ensure accountability if developed nations
don't act. That's a fair challenge. But it proves our point even more. If the most
capable countries can't be compelled through diplomatic norms, how do we
expect poorer ones to act without support? That's precisely why the
responsibility must begin with those at the top.

Conclusion:
Responsibility is not just about emissions - it's about capability, capacity, and
conscience. Developed nations must carry the heavier load, not just because
they caused more harm, but because they are better equipped to fix it. Climate
justice demands no less.

4. Rebuttal Round 2 - Rebuttal Team (Against the Motion)

Second Rebuttal Member - 2.5 mins

Cross-questioning segment:
Q1: If developed countries fund climate action in developing nations, wouldn't
that bridge the gap you mentioned?
A1 (Speaker 2): Funding is part of the solution, but the commitment to act must
be stronger. We're asking for leadership, not charity.

Q2: Isn't it true that without differentiated responsibility, developing nations

might struggle to meet climate goals?
A2 (Speaker 2): Exactly. That's why our model supports leadership from those
with more capacity, so the global burden is shared more realistically.

9
 Past Winners:
Legends of the Podium
This debate championship has consistently showcased eloquence, sharp reasoning, and
dynamic dialogue. Across three editions, different universities have engaged in insightful
exchanges, making each event intellectually enriching. We proudly honor the exceptional
winners for their analytical depth and persuasive skills.

Shri Naveen Agarwal Ji Memorial National Debate Competition ’22:

1st prize: Law College, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun
2nd prize: University College of Law Studies
3rd prize: IMS Law College, Noida

Clash of Certitude ’23:

1st prize: Mahadevi Institute of Technology, Dehradun
2nd prize: Law College, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun
3rd prize: IMS Unison University, Dehradun

Clash of Certitude ’24:

1st prize: SGRR University, Dehradun
2nd prize: Law College, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun
3rd prize: Law College, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun

A new era of debaters is dawning—it's time to make your mark!

Who will rise as the next champion of The Clash Of Certitude 3.0?

THIS YEAR’S HONOUR

Experience Eloquence Amongst The Best!
Win Exciting Cash Prizes!
Certificates For Everyone!

10
 CORE TEAM
CLASH OF CERTITUDE 2025

Public Relations Team : Content & Social Media Team:

Heads: Heads:
Ms. Nupur Khatri - 3rd Year BTCSE Ms. Megha Kashyap-3rd Year BPHARM
Ms. Shivangi Rajput - 3rd Year BTCSE Mr. Priyanshu Verma - 3rd Year BCA

Vice Heads: Vice Heads:

Ms. Gauri Panwar - 2nd Year BTCSE Ms. Shreya Singh - 2nd Year BTCSE
Ms. Yamini Mishra - 2nd Year BTCSE Ms. Avni Nautiyal - 2nd Year BTCSE
Technical & Design Team :
Organising Team :
Heads:
Heads:
Mr. Mayank Agarwal - 3rd Year BTCSE
Ms. Amrita Sharma - 3rd Year BCA
Mr. Devansh - 3rd Year BTCSE
Vice Heads:
Mr. Shoaib Ahamad Mev - 3rd Year BTCSE
Ms. Adya Jha - 2nd Year BTCSE
Mr. Anubhav Thakur - 2nd Year BTCS
Vice Heads:
Ms.Shagun Saini - 2nd Year BTCSE
Tab Team : Mr.Anant Saxena - 2nd Year BTCIVIL
Heads: Ms. Chavi Tomar - 2nd Year BTCSE
Mr. Atik Zafar - 3rd Year BTCSE
Anchoring Team:
Vice Heads: Heads:
Mr. Sumit Kumar Singh - 2nd Year BTCSE Ms. Gauri Goyal - 3rd Year BTCSE
Ms. Jhanvi Pundir - 2nd Year BPHARM Ms. Varuna Saini - 3rd Year BDES
Ms. Mehak Mittal - 2nd Year BPHARM

CONVENORS

Mr. Ankit Karmakar Ms. Tanuja Baluni

President Governor
The Debating Society The Debating Society
4th Year, BTCSE 3rd Year, B.SC (HONS.) PHY

11
 ITINERARY

S.NO. EVENT TIMINGS

1. Team Arrival and Registration 8:00 AM - 8:45 AM

2. Welcome and Salutations 9:00 AM - 9:50 AM

3. Chief Guest Addressal 9:50 AM – 10:10 AM

4. Introduction to Debate and Rules 10:10 AM – 10:25 AM

5. Debate Phase 1 10:25 AM – 1:10 PM

6. Lunch 1:10 PM – 2:00 PM

7. Debate Phase 2 2:10 PM – 5:00 PM

8. Judges Addressal 5:00 PM – 5:30 PM

9. Result Declaration 5:30 PM – 5:45 PM

10. Vote of Thanks 5:45 PM – 5:55 PM

11. Photography Session 5:55 PM – 6:15 PM

12. Closing Assembly 6:15 PM – 6:30 PM

12