It was way back in 1999 on September 9, during the height of Reformasi, when the former Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad visited Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) main campus in Bangi, Selangor for a meet the students session.
Despite him facing a tested time in his political career for his abrupt sacking of his deputy, Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy and corruption charges which drew large street demonstrations against it, his visit to the campus was nevertheless a total contrast judging by the warm welcome extended by hundreds of undergraduates who chanted “Hidup Mahathir”, in a show of support to the former Prime Minister.
Sitting on stage together with the student leaders from public universities from throughout the nation, it was an atmosphere full of anticipation from the audience, comprising UKM undergraduates on what the former Prime Minister was going to say.
Being one of those who attended the session, I still remember vividly how the student leaders bombarded Dr Mahathir with questions, from government policies to the abrupt sacking of Anwar Ibrahim.
A student leader was bold enough to question Dr Mahathir on why student leaders were not invited to sit in the weekly Cabinet meeting which would provide the channel for the students to voice out their views on certain government policies.
Nonchalantly, Dr Mahathir without immediately answering to the question gave an overview of the country’s state of economy by explaining that farmers and fishermen contributed millions of ringgit annually to the country’s coffer.
MTUC and Cuepacs, he added being the largest workers unions with thousands of members had also played a major role in contributing to the country’s economic development.
Neither the MTUC nor Cuepacs he said had ever requested him to sit in the Cabinet to formulate government policies.
Then came the stinging remark by the sarcastic Dr Mahathir who revealed that the government had to spend a major portion of its income in education. Thus he said the role of the students was to study hard and not to meddle in politics or the administration of the government.
Without saying yes or no to the question, Dr Mahathir just sat down and calmly took a sip of water to quench his thirst after a long reply before he stood up again upon request from the audience for his answer. His reply? Just a loud and simple “NO”.
Fast forward to today in 2008. Various parties, from politicians to human rights activists have called on the government to repeal the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) 1971 which they deem as curbing the freedom of students to actively involve in politics.
The UUCA 1971 came about after the students became involved in a number of public debates and demonstrations in support of all kinds of causes following the eruption of racial riots on May 13 1969.
The government reacted in 1975 by amending the Act which bars political activism by students and academicians and the Act becomes the blinkers to students for they are prevented from expressing themselves on issues.
Under the Act, independent student unions and other popular student organizations which had for years organised activities for their member atrophied.
Any activities organized must first be approved by the vice chancellors and heads of administration.
Certain quarters have pointed their fingers at the Act for partly responsible for the type of graduates the public universities produce these days.
The Higher Education Minister, Mohamed Khaled Nordin had said during the Malaysian Student Leaders Summit recently that the amended Act, which would be tabled in the coming Parliament sitting, would still not allow students from joining political parties.
Nevertheless, he added that students would be allowed to meet and discuss with politicians, including those from the Opposition at seminars, forums and talks.
However, topics should be submitted to public universities before hand and that it is conducted in a discussion or debate format to enable various parties to present opinions while allowing the minister to monitor and know what the students are exposed to.
Khaled went on to say that politicians would not use the same tactics during the recent March 8 general election campaigning as students nowadays are knowledgeable lot and could judge for themselves.
The Bill, if passed in Parliament, would see that university students would only face disciplinary actions from their universities rather than prosecution if they are found to be involved in political parties or unlawful organizations.
Politicians will also be allowed to enroll for courses in universities without needing to give up their political career with the final decision resting on the university vice chancellors.
University students facing criminal charges, detention, restriction or imprisonment for offences committed outside the campus may also be permitted to sit for examinations.
The Bill also provides for the setting up of a committee to advise the Higher Education Minister on the choice of vice chancellors and the university’s composition, management and selection of the university’s board of directors and their tenures.
Many have portrayed UUCA 1971 as a government’s tool to limit dissidence among the youths and that it was legislated merely to allow students to focus on education rather than politics.
In the society which is so immersed with Western ideologies for more freedom of expression or speech, the repeal of UUCA 1971 is of course very much called for but would it come with an expense?
Pictures of student dissidence who took to the street several years ago in Jakarta could perhaps give a second thought that it might bring more harms than good if there is no restriction to the students freedom.
While it is alright to at least grant the students freedom to express themselves on certain issues, it must not be done at the expense of their education for their responsibility is to study.
Would parents be worried if the whole campus is turned into political hive where what their children get is not education lectures or tutorials but political ceramahs with politicians from both divides storming the campus like nobody’s business to garner students support?
The amended Act must provide students with a conducive and progressive learning environment in order to contribute to the students’ success and achievements.
With almost all the campuses having their annual election to elect the office bearers of students council, such exposure is good enough to give students a taste of politics in their own confined and safe environment before they eventually join the real politics out there after graduation should they decide to.
There is nothing wrong with students attending political ceramahs, seminars or forums as such exposure would definitely be enriching.
The amendment to the Act is of course a significant first step in the leap forward to enable universities to increase free space and improve performance while allowing students to greater freedom and be aware of public issues and directly prepare them for life after they graduate.
With the emergence of ICT where free flow of information is unstoppable, there is no way that we can stop anyone from voicing their views.
Voicing views on issues is almost welcome of university students who may shed lights to the government but such exposure must not compromise the real cause of a university student, which is to attain knowledge rather than mere politicking.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment