In condemning the reaction of the Universiti Malaya authorities to a forum organised by the students’ union, which I wrote about yesterday, Gerak, an association of Malaysian academics, lamented on Oct 16 the sorry state of affairs at the nation’s top university.
Noting that UM used to be “a beacon” for progressive higher education, Gerak said: “It had excellent top leadership such as the late royal professor Ungku Aziz and Syed Hussain Al-Atas, although, sadly, the latter was hard done by due to the politics of the period.
“It had fiery student leaders such as Anwar Ibrahim and world-class academics like Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Syed Husin Ali and Edmund Terence Gomez. It had a vibrant speaker’s corner and a variety of strong student unions that prepared young adults for the world outside campus.
“Its students and faculty stood right up there with the best in the world. But not anymore. While UM is still regarded as Malaysia’s top university, that says more about the limitations of the other universities than it does of UM’s inherent quality.”
Most Malaysians would agree.
Gerak said the rot started when the higher education system was politicised from the 1970s. It was made worse, Gerak said, by repressive laws like the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA) and “having technocrats and political toadies replace genuine scholars with a vision to helm education in Malaysia”.
If political control, toadies in university leadership positions and repressive laws are the problem, then there is no better time than now – during the 15th general election – to seek a remedy.
Educationists, activists and student bodies should press contesting individuals and political parties to pledge to do away with the repressive laws and to appoint capable, qualified and thinking professionals to administer universities.
Their votes, and the votes of other like-minded voters, should go to those candidates and parties which agree that students and academics in public universities should have greater freedom and that only capable administrators – regardless of political affiliation and race – should be appointed.
In other words, universities and their management should be left to academics and professionals, not politicians.
It must be noted that in December 2018, Parliament did amend certain sections of the UUCA, the Private Higher Educational Institutions Act 1996 (PHEIA), and the Educational Institutions (Discipline) Act 1976 (EIDA), enabling university and college students to participate in on-campus political activities without fear of repercussion – after 47 years.
In amending the laws, the Pakatan Harapan government said it intended to repeal the UUCA by 2020. However, PH fell before it could do this due to the political games of some MPs and certain parties.
In August this year, the then higher education minister Noraini Ahmad of the Barisan Nasional-led government said the UUCA would not be repealed.
Despite the amendments, the situation in universities hasn’t improved much, as the incident where UM authorities turned off the public address system to prevent a former student from speaking at a forum on freedom organised by the students’ union on campus on Oct 13 this year shows.
We have heard that academics are afraid to make public their views on the way universities or the nation is administered for fear of action against them.
In fact, in 2015, academic Khoo Ying Hooi of UM was investigated under Section 500 of the Penal Code for defamation over an article titled “Who owns the police?”
Worse, there are accusations that some academics even carry out research that support government policies or ideas to ensure they move up the hierarchy.
Two academics, associate professor Dr Adnan Trakic of Monash University and Dr Ashgar Ali Ali Mohamed of the International Islamic University Malaysia, in writing about academic freedom on April 1 in the media, said, among other things, that academics in public universities were considered civil servants under Article 132(1) of the Federal Constitution and, as such, were subject to the Statutory Bodies (Discipline and Surcharge) Act 2000 (Act 605).
“This is problematic as some of the provisions in Act 605 severely restrict academic freedom. Section 18, for example, prohibits the making and circulating of statements to the public that are critical of the government or its policies.
“While academics are university employees and owe a duty of obedience to the employer, they, being public intellectuals, owe a duty to the public. When there is a conflict between public and private interests, public interest prevails.
“This, however, does not seem to be the case with academic freedom. Often, universities are likely to sanction academics for making statements that harm their reputation even if they are made in the interest of the public.”
Saying the mere prospect of being sanctioned for making a statement that could be deemed contrary to the provisions of Act 605 would, on its own, discourage academics from expressing views freely, the duo adds:
“If the academics choose to speak and write as public intellectuals and not as government intellectuals (employees), they could be sanctioned. Is not this antipodal to the principles of academic freedom?”
This, of course, is not an acceptable situation. As academics are mostly experts in their respective fields, we need them to speak up on issues in those areas in pursuance of the public good.
The public sentiment today is that there aren’t too many capable academics and that many of those teaching in our universities are not exactly critical nor clear thinkers, nor even qualified to be there. That explains why the derogatory term “kangkong professors” has become part of everyday Malaysian vocabulary.
I believe one reason for this is that the university environment does not allow academics – and students – to bloom to their full potential.
It’s time, therefore, to remove restraints on academics and other public intellectuals so that they can truly contribute towards the upliftment of the nation in all areas.
GE15 is a good time for all voters, especially academics and those involved or interested in higher education, to get a commitment from political parties and contestants to repeal repressive laws that are holding back academics. And to support those who are open to this idea.
It is also the right time to get politicians to pledge not to interfere in the administration of universities and to ensure only capable, competent, open minded and visionary academics are appointed to top university positions.
Let’s free universities to do what they’re supposed to do and give us graduates who are skilled, competent, open minded, passionate about their areas of endeavour, empathetic, creative, responsible, unafraid of new challenges, have a sense of humour and who think critically and clearly.
