TOC thanks Malaysiakini for allowing us to publish the following article from its website.
Rahmah Ghazali
The controversial Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) was in the spotlight again today when a deputy minister reinforced the government’s stand that university students should not get involved with political parties.
Amid the amendments, Deputy Minister of Higher Education Idris Harun said Section 15 of the act, which states that students can join outside bodies but are still banned from joining political parties, was still relevant in preventing students from being influenced by any political party.
“They have to know that their priority in university is to study,” he said in response to a supplementary question in the House posed by Khairy Jamaluddin (BN-Rembau).
Idris justified the ban by stressing that political influence will not create a “conducive environment” for the students in which to study, but also promote “racial ideology and racial polarisation”.
He said students had many other means to get involved in politics by not joining a particular party.
“A lot of universities offer Political Science as a subject where they (students) can study the subject academically and systematically without leaning towards political culture.
“They are also not restricted from doing research and academic writing pertaining to politics in the country. Besides that, they still have the freedom to get involved in campus elections,” stressed Idris.
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.
Students allowed to join NGOs
Earlier, the deputy minister responded to a question from Abdul Hadi Awang (PAS-Marang) who queried if the amendment to the act was made with agreement from political parties, organisations, universities and student leaders.
Idris said his ministry had consulted members of parliament, from both the government and opposition, and also various ministries.
“We also consulted the university directory boards, academicians, chancellors, legal advisors and student leaders,” he explained, adding that a human rights commission was also consulted.
Idris said students were still free to join non-governmental organisations, in order to become “the leaders of the future”.
Among others, the amendments to the UUCA once passed would see students facing disciplinary action instead of prosecution if found to be involved in political parties or unlawful organisations.
Other latitudes of the altered act also allows for the enrolment of politicians for courses in universities without having to sacrifice their political career with the discretion of the vice-chancellor of the university.
The date of the debate in the House for the UUCA amendments is yet to be fixed.
———–
Students, just like any other citizens, are affected by decisions made at the parliament. Students today are future workers. Does not any economic, labour or monetary policies made by the Malaysian parliament today will affect the students?
By denying student unions the right to participate in politics, the Malaysian Parliament is sending out the message that politics should be left to an exclusive pool of players.
Even then, student unions can still be political while remaining non-partisan. But rejecting the claim to be partisan only reflects the short-sightedness of the Malaysian government.
Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. -Justice Learned Hand.
Put it in historical perspective. The UUCA was passed in 1971, coincidental with the formal articulation of the NEP, and new amendments to the ISA. In 1974, there was a spate of student-supported protests around Malaysia supporting impoverished farmers against government relocation projects. Thus, in December1974, the police raided University Malaya hostels and detailed under ISA student leaders and university lecturers, including Anwar Ibrahim. This in turn sparked off another round of protests on campus, which in turn lead to another police raid and arrests of more students. The government produced a white paper claiming that the Communist party of Malaysia was to blame, even though it is known that the movement was also led by Malay activists.
Thus, the UUCA was amended to what it is today: it proscribes political involvement of students and lecturers and limits societies, student meetings and the autonomy of student union. The UUCA is not about protecting students, it’s about protecting the current regime, which might be good or bad depending how you argue it.
One argument goes, “[the government's] real fear was of a Malay-led multi-racial, class-aligned movement which had begun to challenge the inability of the Malay bourgeoisie to solve a range of serious social and economic problems in teh country.”
cit. Anne Munro-Kua (1993) Authoritarian Populism in ability of Malaysia pp 82-83
On the other hand, the classical argument proposed by Malaysian and Singaporean arguments are that you need such authoritarianism to put down dissent from existing powerholders to necessary economic reforms in the economic restructuring of society.
You tell me.
On the other hand, the classical argument proposed by Malaysian and Singaporean arguments are that you need such authoritarianism to put down dissent from existing powerholders to necessary economic reforms in the economic restructuring of society. – #3
Correction: The argument proposed by the Malaysian and Singaporean ruling parties is that one needs authoritarianism to put down dissent to necessitate economic reforms for the good of the economy. If only that is true, South Korea and Hong Kong would not be successful examples whereby non-authoritarianism still lead to a successful economy.