Academic Repression Stifles Excellence and Critical Thinking

Press Statement by Member of Parliament Klang Charles Santiago in Klang on 14^th Oct 2009

Six Universiti Malaya students involved in the Chinese language debate society were summoned to a disciplinary inquiry on 12 Oct 2009 for allegedly organizing a politically oriented debate.

All they did was to invite a few politicians to act as judges in a debate on the recent political developments in the country.

Two other students also faced the disciplinary committee for having invited Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, the political secretary to the Menteri Besar of Selangor and member of the Selangor Legislative Assembly to officiate University Malaya’s annual general meeting without express permission from the university.

The university has accused the students of violating the rules and regulations of the varsity and contravening the infamous University and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA).  The Act was introduced with the specific purpose of regulating and stifling student activism.

The Chairman of the disciplinary committee Professor Faisal Ali said the disciplinary board would decide if they were in violation of the UUCA. The highest punishment is expulsion from the university.

According to the UM students association, the Students Affair Department had approved the debate and was informed of the topic and particulars of invited judges. The department only advised the organiser not to organise any activities with political element in the future.

The UCCA has been a subject of contention as its provisions have been used to curb university and college students from taking an active part in politics. It also appears to be the most backward legislation from a freedom of association and expression perspective.

It is vital that universities and institutions of higher learning encourage intellectual freedom and not infringe on their academic freedom and autonomy. Students must be encouraged, motivated and nurtured to think and express themselves without fear of persecution.

Ironically, when the government found the Malaysian university ranking had dropped by a big scale, it decided to amend the UUCA in order to give the universities more autonomous power and release students’ innovation as the act had greatly dampened the independence and critical thinking of university students.

However, it appears that the ‘law and order’ mindset in managing universities dominate the minds of administrators and government.  Universities need to be autonomous in order to produce world class thinkers and leaders.

It is disappointing to note that the joy of re-listing University Malaysia in the top 200 universities list has been marred by this unfortunate incident. University Malaya has to be reminded that a university cannot achieve academic excellence without respecting the freedom of expression.

Hence, I strongly urge University Malaya to immediately drop any charges that are being contemplated against the eight students. The ministry of education needs to review the UUCA, remove all oppressive provisions and uphold the academic freedom and fundamental rights of students.

Charles Santiago

Member of Parliament, Klang

Vice-Chairman of Selangor DAP

016 626 7797

 

大专法令修订法案今午表决 民联及废法联盟促议员否决

Source : Merdeka Review

Title : UUCA amendments would be decided this afternoon, PR and GMMA urge MPs to oppose the bill

■日期／Dec 11, 2008 ■时间／04:01:35 pm

■新闻／家国风云 ■作者／本刊曾薛霏

【本刊曾薛霏撰述】人民联盟国会议员及“废除大专法令联盟”都认为，《2008年大专法令修订法案》赋予高教部长的权力太大，意在进一步箝制学生和学术人员的自由，因此呼吁全体国会议员别支持今午表决的修订案二读。此外，他们也建议设立国会特选委员会再咨询及研究修订案内容。

民 联议员和废除大专法令联盟今天先后在国会走廊召开记者会，齐声反对正在下议院中二读的《大专法令修订法案》；他们一致认为，修订案中赋予高等教育部长的权 力太大，进一步侵蚀校园行政机构的自主性。此外，原本已不能参与政党及校外社团的大专生，法案修订后，连对某个组织表示支持或同情都不能，加深了对大专生 的控制。

民 主行动党雪兰莪州八打灵再也北区国会议员潘检伟（左图中）详细列出《大专法令修订法案》的种种问题及建议修改，包括对“学生”字眼的诠释过于广阔（涵盖硕 博士学生）、高等教育部长权力过大（例如委任分校校长或图书馆馆长都需部长同意）、学生不能对任何组织表示同情或支持、一旦被指控触犯纪律条规，必须面对 处罚，以及无需证明学生已触犯条规等。

人 民公正党吉兰丹州马樟区国会议员赛夫丁（Saifudin Nasution，左图右）表示，《大专法令修订法案》使权力都集中在部长手上，再加上高教部选择性对付学生，不会使校园更好。他以巫统女青团为例，大专 校园打开大门迎接巫统进入校园，让女青团在开学首日招收党员。此外，在英国的留学生共成立了20个巫统俱乐部，但都没有面对任何问题。

他也透露，下议院昨天二读《大专法令修订法案》时，民联议员积极参加辩论，国阵议员却没有参与辩论。

修订案不能解决校园问题

废除大专法令联盟代表郑屹强促请国会议员别支持即将在今午表决的《大专法令修订法案》，并建议设立国会特选委员会再研究该法案。他认为，此修订案不能解决校园面对的问题，反而使问题加剧。

除了高教部长权力过度集中之外，郑屹强也认为，学生应该享有的言论自由宪赋权利也被侵蚀。

他认为，应该设立特选委员会研究此法案，以确保大专院校的学术自由和自主权，而特选委员会应由一些为此法案斗争的国会议员组成，但高教部长不应成为委员，因为部长必定会通过修订案扩大权力，是既得利益者。

废除大专法令联盟学运代表王泽钦批评国阵政府没有诚意，因为学生一直致力于和高教部长对话，也曾在高教部外请愿，但是高教部长始终不愿和学生对话。

民主行动党雪兰莪州巴生区国会议员查尔斯圣地亚哥（Charles Santiago）表示，较早前在一项大专法令的圆桌会议中，邀请到大专讲师和学生讨论，许多学生和学术人员都拒绝《大专法令修订法案》。

查尔斯表示，当校园内的重要关系人学术人员和学生都不接受《大专法令修订法案》，高教部应该将这项法案带回去继续研究。他支持学生的意见，认为应该设立特选委员会研究此法案。

More News reports :

China Press : 大專生聯盟請高教部 設委會檢討大專法

Malaysiakini Chinese : 学生抨大专令修正案换汤不换药 民联动议删除禁止参加政党条文

 

UUCA: Abolish or amend?

Source : Malaysiakini

Rahmah Ghazali | Nov 8, 08 10:25am The Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) has long been deemed controversial, especially among academicians, politicians, NGOs and students. But how far are they willing to go to make their objections known in Parliament?

MCPX

As the much awaited debate is just three weeks away, many are preparing to go all out to make their views on the matter heard.

In a round-table discussion on the Act chaired by opposition member of parliament Charles Santiago yesterday, academics from Gerakan Mahasiswa Mansuhkan AUKU (GMMA), Persatuan Kakitangan Akademik UM (PKAUM), International Islamic University Malaysia’s Academics and Staff Association (IIUMASA), Gerakan Demokratik Pemuda dan Mahasiswa Malaysia (Dema) and the National Union for Private Higher Education Learning’s academic staff (KAPTS) unanimously spoke against the amendments.

The panelists, who spoke in the two-hour discussion, said the amendments would only “restrict the critical minds of students” and send them into “a state of fear”.

As time is ticking away to the second-reading of the Act to allow it to be debated in Parliament, Santiago and the panel suggested that academicians, politicians, students and even parents play a role in investigating the core problems of the proposed amendments.

If the amendments are passed, students will risk facing disciplinary action instead of prosecution if found to be involved in political parties or unlawful organisations.

Other latitudes of the altered Act also allow for the enrolment of politicians in university courses without having to sacrifice their political careers, at the discretion of the vice-chancellor of the university.

The UUCA has been widely condemned by student bodies in the country who feel that they should be given the freedom to voice their opinions on both local and international political issues.

Against Federal Constitution

Faridzul Nasaruddin representing GMMA said the Act should be abolished on the grounds that it went against the Federal Constitution and United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

“It should let us express ourselves, especially on political issues. But this Act clearly goes against our basic human rights,” Faridzul said.

Dema representative Niew Ti Hooi also expressed her disgust at the amendments, saying the law was made “to instill fear”.

Rasah parliamentarian Anthony Loke (left) agreed, saying, “the Act would only create fear among students as early as the first week of their lives in university”.

“Most of the students do not have a basic knowledge of what the Act is all about. However, when they first join university, they will learn that this Act will go against their will but they will have to accept it.

“Thus, many of them will have this idea of going to university with one purpose, to study and nothing else. That is why we do not have many students who are critical in their thinking,” Loke said.

Meanwhile, according to deputy chairperson of the Bar Council’s Human Rights Committee, Andrew Khoo (left), the amendments were made because the government feared students.

“Because they are scared of the students’ bravery and idealism, the amendments were made,” said Andrew, citing a massive anti-Vietnam war protest involving students in the US in the 1960s as an example.

Persatuan Kakitangan Akademik UM (PKAUM) Azmi Sharom was also on the same page with the panelists, saying the amendments would only serve to control the governance of the university and student behaviour.

“That is why the amendments are not going to help,” added Azmi.

Don’t just protest and walk out

As the debate on the amendments will be held in Parliament in the second week of December, National Union for Higher Education Learning academic staff secretary-general, Faisal Mustaffa, said it should be held in a professional manner.

He added that it is vital for the opposition to settle the issue democratically with the government. Hence, they should only choose to protest or walk out of Parliament as a last resort.

Santiago said academicians and students should approach their constituency representatives to voice their concerns over the amendments.

“That way, they (elected reps) will address the problem as we come from their constituency,” he said.

Among others, the panelists also suggested that academicians and students collaborate to get their messages across, including issuing a joint-memorandum.

“The MPs should also be involved in this matter, and it would be easier if we could send a memorandum to them personally,” said Faridzul.

 

Perbincangan Meja Bulat AUKU

Tarikh : 7hb Nov 2008

Masa : 10am – 12pm

Tempat : Bilik Seminar JK3, Parlimen

Peserta : Ahli-ahli parlimen, ahli akademik, pemimpin mahasiswa, wakil NGO yang dijemput. Wartawan dan jurugambar dijemput hadir untuk meliputi berita ini.

 

Students defy repressive laws in solidarity with workers

Source : Mkini

Baradan Kuppusamy | Aug 15, 08 11:42am

For nearly four decades undergraduates in this country were banned from owning loud hailers – a powerful symbol of dissent in the 1970s. MCPX Such repression is believed to have killed student activism and intellectual inquiry on campuses, and the government is now under increasing pressure to amend regulations through parliamentary legislation. For one thing the campuses have grown in number from just three in 1970 – when the restrictive laws were passed – to over 300 public and private institutions, hosting an undergraduate population running into hundreds of thousands. And, for another, government policy aimed at turning Malaysia into an international education hub has attracted students from many developing countries, giving the campuses a multi-cultural character that grates against the old, draconian laws. Students are now forming groups and non-government organisations (NGOs) that oppose a regime that compares poorly with the dynamic environment found in the campuses of neighbouring countries like Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines. It is seen that in today’s world of Internet and instant mobile communication a law that bans loud hailers is a major embarrassment. In early August, the government announced plans to amend the laws that will hopefully unshackle undergraduates and unleash a new force in a society emerging from long years of oppressive rule. Like a police department Students complain of an atmosphere of fear over campuses. “They are like a police department on campus and no one dares cross them,” a third-year student leader said referring to the dreaded Students Affairs Division (SAD) and asking not to be named for fear of punitive action. While political leaders and human rights activists are hopeful of major changes soon, undergraduates and student leaders remain skeptical, saying that promises made in the past withered away because of strong opposition from the political establishment. Under the current proposal the University and University Colleges Act, 1971 or UUCA is to be amended to allow greater freedom of association and expression for university students. As of now an undergraduate is banned from having dealings with any society, political party, trade union or organisations without advanced written approval from the vice-chancellor. If the student contravenes these restrictions, it is considered an offence that is punishable, on conviction, by a fine or a prison term. The student is automatically suspended or dismissed from the university without any recourse for continuing his studies. The proposed changes say that: undergraduates may join any organisation or NGO without prior permission; offences under the act are no longer criminal in nature; students detained or jail can continue studies from detention centres; vice-chancellor will not be a political appointee; faculty deans are to be selected after consultation with staff. Changes on the way The amendments have been tabled in parliament and are due for debate before becoming law, if approved. Students and civil rights activists while welcoming the proposals say in the core area where freedom and student activism really counts, i.e. political participation, the government has refused to relax the tough conditions. Undergraduates are banned from making political statements, joining political parties and involving themselves in political activities. “They are allowing greater freedom but where it really counts – political freedom and expression – they are still fearful that undergraduates will become an anti-establishment force,” said former student leader S Arulchelvam, who is now secretary general of the Socialist Party of Malaysia. “They fear undergraduates would form a formidable political movement that would challenge the status quo,” he told IPS. While each campus has its own student body, usually docile and apolitical, the Malaysia Youth and Students Democratic Movement or DEMA, an independent student body that seeks to be an umbrella organisation for all undergraduates, has been vocal in championing student activism despite harassment and even arrests. “Our stand is that the university law should be abolished and replaced with a new university act that protects undergraduate basic rights,” said Ong Jing Cheng, DEMA’s secretary for international affairs. “Undergraduates should be consulted during the drafting process,” he told IPS. “The university law has been used to curb student activism ever since it was enacted in 1971 to curb freedom of expression and freedom of association.” “We don’t want to be cheated by cosmetic changes of the law,” Ong said. “All proposed changes must be fully made public so that everyone can give crucial feedback.” A former academic turned politician Dr Koh Tsu Koon welcomed the proposed amendments to the university law, saying it was a giant step in the right direction and long overdue. “However, the time has come for the authorities to allow students to participate in political activities,” he told local newspapers, lending his prestige to promote student activism. Former student activist-turned-opposition lawmaker Charles Santiago criticised the proposed changes as “cosmetic” and demanded that authorities repeal all laws that curb freedom of expression and assembly. “Universities must promote independent thinking and to process and create new knowledge and clamping down on the student freedom will only defeat the purpose of setting up universities in the first place,” he said in a statement. “Dissent is an integral process of democracy and should not be curbed,” he said. “It is common knowledge that political motivation is behind the creation of the University and University Colleges Act and aimed at suppressing the growth of a vigorous student movement.’’ – IPS

 

查尔斯斥参政阻发展论 “大专生须独立思考”

Source : Sinchew Daily

Tile : Charles rebuts participate in politics will deter development, “university students must be independant thinking”

 

University must uphold the spirit of freedom and pluralism

PRESS STATEMENT

I beg to differ with Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Khaled Nordin that university students holistic development would be deterred if they were allowed to join political parties.

The proposed changes to the University and University Colleges ACT (UUCA) is purely cosmetic. The key role of institutions of higher learning is to promote independent thinking and the ability to process and create new knowledge. Therefore to clamp down on the freedom of students to partake in active politics is to curb any form of dissent in the country.

The Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s rallying cry at the general election is to bring about reforms. But the stay on the ban reflects that the administration and Barisan Nasional fears student power. It is also clear that Abdullah is following in the footsteps of former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad, whose 22 years in power was largely attributed to the use of various laws to thwart nonconformity.

It is common knowledge that the enactment and amendment of the University and University Colleges Act in 1971 were politically motivated to suppress vigorous student movement. However the assault on student movements only moved to further radicalize them. This is evident in the conviction by the students to stand by squatter dwellers and rubber tappers in the Tasik Utara (Johor) and Baling incidents, respectively.

I therefore believe that university and college students must be allowed their basic right to formulate their thoughts and participate in the democratic process of the country. The government must allow the nurturing of an intellectual culture that promotes critical thinking among students.

In view of this, the proposed amendment to UUCA must :

– Promote the fundamental liberty of all students in exercising their democratic and political rights as citizen
– Uphold the spirit of freedom and pluralism
– Ensure academic freedom
– Ensure autonomy of student organizations
– Allow student councils to approve student activities and conduct campus elections

Charles Santiago

Member of Parliament Klang

 

维护大学之自由与多元精神

新闻文告

Title : University must uphold the spirit of freedom and pluralism

高教部长卡立诺丁表示一旦允许大专生参与政党，将阻碍大专生的全面发展和培养第一流的人力资源，我不同意这种说法。

高教部建议的大专法令修改法案，看起来比原来的法令宽松，但却没有提出实质的改革。学生的宪赋自由与人权还是处处受到限制。例如说，不准参与和支持政党，不准参与和支持非法组织，不准和支持参与高教部长禁止参与的团体（第15条(1)与(5)；只允许针对就读的学术领域发言，只能在不是政党或非法组织赞助的活动上发言15条(6)。

高等教育学府必须提倡独立思考，培养研究和创造知识的能力。因此剥夺大专生参与政治乃是打压国内异议的一种手段。

首相阿都拉在第十二届大选后曾声言推动改革，但是大专法令内的限制性条文继续存在，可见当权者和国阵害怕学生的力量。阿都拉无疑将步前首相马哈迪医生后尘，后者在22年的掌权岁月中运用各种不同法律打压异议群体。

大专法令的制定和修改都含有政治目的，当权者在70年代镇压蓬勃的学生运动，但是打压行动反而激化了学生运动。当时的大专生支援打昔乌达勒的木屋区居民和胶工以及华玲饥民的抗议行动，是当权者决心对付学生运动，限制高等学府自由的导火线。

因此，我认为高等学府必须允许大专生行使他们的基本权利，在自由的环境形成他们的思维和参与国家的民主化过程。政府必须培育知识分子文化，养成学生的批判思考能力。

职是之故，我建议大专法令修改法案必须

· 确保学生享有公民的民主与政治权利

· 维护大学的自由与多元精神

· 确保学术自由

· 确保学生团体的自治

· 允许学生理事会批准与举办校园选举

查尔斯.圣地亚哥 敬上

巴生国会议员