inaugural month of blessing

tribute to iLuvIslam.com

forget about the law

Ihsan : Ikatan Pelajar Islam Jepun (ipij.com)

Walau apa jua pandangan terhadap Rang Undang-Undang Akta Universiti Kolej Universiti (AUKU) pindaan 2008 yang sedang dibahaskan di parlimen ketika ini, saya tetap mempertahankan bahawa Akta yang digazetkan pada tahun 1971 ini perlu dihapuskan. Jika Allahyarham Tun Hussein Onn masih hidup saya yakin beliau akan bersetuju dengan saya.

Sungguhpun 'the intention of the framer' pada ketika itu adalah untuk mengawal hak bersuara dan membuang autonomi urus tadbir universiti agar semua itu disekat, AUKU pada pandangan anak muda hari ini tidak lebih sekadar satu dokumen yang tanpa makna lagi melawakkan 'meaningless and ridicolous'.

Bayangkan anak muda siswa tidak boleh menunjukkan apa-apa simpati kepada mana-mana pihak di luar universiti, sedangkan kehidupan mereka sebelum dan selepas universiti adalah di luar sana.

Dialog Rang Undang-Undang AUKU (Pindaan) 2008 di Dewan Auditorium UIAM baru-baru ini adalah signal betapa AUKU yang menjadi hantu kepada anak-anak siswa sejak 30 tahun dahulu sewajarnya dibakul sampahkan. Kehadiran ramai anak muda memenuhkan dewan pada malam itu satu indikator pada perubahan - sama seperti tarikh keramat yang ditunggu pada 16 September nanti.

Para panelis pada malam itu, yang mewakili 3 parti berlainan - YB Salahuddin (PAS-Kubang Kerian), YB Yusmadi (PKR-Balik Pulau) dan YB Dato' Saifuddin (UMNO-Temerloh) secara konsensus bersetuju bahawa akta ini perlu dikaji semula kewujudannya sebagai undang-undang di negara kita.

Akta ini telah membawa kita dan negara kita ke belakang. Akta ini tidak melahirkan anak-anak muda yang kritikal dan analitikal untuk membina negara. Akta ini telah menjadikan negara kita ketinggalan jauh berbanding negara-negara maju di dunia. Hatta Zimbabwe kini telah mengatasi kita dari segi Growth Development Index (GDI) mereka.

Demi memastikan Negara kita maju 50 tahun akan datang, golongan tua-old tai di parlimen mesti memberi ruang dan kebebasan kepada anak muda untuk turut sama menyumbang membangunkan negara. Mengapa siswa yang belajar di luar negara tiada AUKU tetapi boleh saja menyertai Kelab UMNO Luar Negara? Mengapa siswa dalam negara dibonsaikan pemikiran mereka? Bukankah pengajian itu sama dibiayai oleh tax-payer kita juga? kan?

Ruang dan kebebasan ini mesti dipulangkan semula kepada anak-anak muda. Demokrasi dalam dunia pendidikan ini mestilah diserahkan kembali kepada mereka yang berhak dan layak untuk memimpin keunggulannya.

Dunia intelektual hanya akan membangun apabila proses pembangunan insan ini bukan hanya syok didebatkan di Parlimen, tetapi yang paling utama ialah kepercayaan penuh yakin tanpa prasangka dan prejudis pada kemampuan anak muda Malaysia.

Anak muda Malaysia kini telah matang dan berani berubah. Mereka mahukan suasana sekeliling mereka juga turut berubah. Mereka mahukan akta lapuk seperti AUKU tidak lagi diambil pot selepas ini kerana ianya membuang masa.

Sebarang idea untuk kekal bersama sesuatu yang masih lapuk dan usang adalah usaha kembali berpusing ke belakang ibarat mengharapkan Altantuya hidup semula.

Lupakan tentang AUKU. Mari kita terus maju membina diri dan membangunkan negara. Anak muda tidak perlu ambil pot lagi pasal AUKU. Jika tidak kerana AUKU, sudah tentu universiti negara kita hari ini setaraf dengan Harvard dan NUS.

post permatang pauh, what's next?

Keputusan rasmi Pilihanraya Kecil Permatang Pauh akhirnya telah jelas dan terbukti. Datuk Seri Anwar-PKR telah memenangi kerusi parlimen tersebut dengan majoriti 15,671 undi mengatasi lawannya Datuk Ariff Shah-BN. Calon Akim-Hanafi Mamat hanya memperolehi 92 undi.

Tarikh 27 Ogos 2008 mencatat sejarah tersendiri apabila bermulanya satu lagi era baru bagi Malaysia. Sekembalinya Datuk Seri Anwar ke Parlimen selepas 12 tahun hidup di dalam penjara, rakyat menaruh harapan baru kepadanya untuk membawa pembaharuan yang disebut fajar baru untuk Malaysia.

Pilihanraya kecil Permatang Pauh ini mencatat keunikan tersendiri. Segala kemelut yang melanda negara sebelum pilihanraya kini terjawab dengan berakhirnya pilihanraya kecil ini. Kes Saiful, Ramlang Porigi akan pergi selepas ini.

Hakikatnya rakyat Permatang Pauh masih sayangkan Anwar dan mahukan beliau sebagai wakil mereka. Rakyat Malaysia secara umumnya juga mahukan suara Datuk Seri Anwar dalam Parlimen Malaysia.

Namun apa yang pasti semua ini bukanlah penghujung sebuah cerita. Mungkin ini adalah permulaan bagi sebuah sejarah. Rakyat umumnya masih lagi yang ditunggu-tunggu akan satu lagi peristiwa besar yang bakal mewarnai landskap politik tanah air. Tidak lain dan tidak bukan, peristiwa itu adalah tarikh 16 September 2008 yang akan datang.

Benarkah kita akan bertukar kerajaan Persekutuan pada tarikh itu? Benarkah kita akan mendapat kerajaan baru di bawah nama Pakatan Rakyat? Pelbagai persoalan timbul khususnya dari sudut undang-undang Perlembagaan.

Meskipun pelbagai persepsi, andaian, tanggapan dan telahan diberikan oleh rakyat Malaysia, saya yakin dan percaya bahawa apa yang kita mahukan adalah pembaharuan yang tidak membawa kepada sebarang kesan negatif kepada negara.

Rakyat mahukan perubahan ini dilakukan dengan penuh tertib, aman dan selamat tanpa berlaku huru-hara dan kacau bilau terutamanya dalam konteks kepelbagaian kaum di negara kita. Kita berdoa dan berharap agar tiada pihak yang cuba memprovokasi situasi hari ini dengan cuba melanggar kedaulatan undang-undang negara kita.

Sesungguhnya kemenangan Datuk Seri Anwar ini bukanlah bermakna perjuangan ke arah perubahan itu telah berakhir. Adakah selepas menyatakan sokongan dan harapan pada perubahan maka tugas majoriti rakyat yang inginkan perubahan telah selesai?

Bagi saya ini adalah satu pandangan dan mentaliti yang salah lagi membebalkan. Rakyat yang mahukan perubahan maka rakyat jugalah yang mesti terus bekerja untuk perubahan itu.

Berita tentang tuduhan kesalahan rasuah yang melibatkan 2 Exco Kerajaan Perak baru-baru ini wajar dijadikan iktibar dan muhasabah. Sungguhpun kes ini masih lagi dalam perbicaraan mahkamah, namun apa yang harus dipelajari ialah sikap sentiasa berwaspada dengan tindakan sesetengah pihak yang sentiasa mencari peluang dan kelemahan dalam pentadbiran kerajaan PR. Keteguhan dan keutuhan kerajaan PR akan sentiasa diuji dari semasa ke semasa.

Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat mesti sentiasa bersikap jujur dengan rakyat dengan memastikan prinsip CAT (Competent-Accountable-Transparent) itu benar-benar dilaksanakan dan dipenuhi. Jika perkara ini tidak berlaku maka tiada maknanya perubahan itu sekiranya ia lebih kurang sama dengan pentadbiran sebelumnya.

Hari ini kita mendapat tahu bahawa sebenarnya rakyat Malaysia tidak takut untuk berubah. Ini lebih bermakna bagi seorang anak muda yang mempunyai aspirasi yang tinggi untuk melihat negara lebih maju dan terkehadapan untuk 50 tahun berikutnya. Ini menggerakkan lagi azam dan cita-cita untuk mempertahankan prinsip dan kedaulatan undang-undang dalam negara demi memastikan generasi akan datang menghargai erti hidup dalam sebuah negara merdeka.

Terima kasih kepada semua yang telah sama-sama menggerakkan perubahan ini. Kita berdoa agar hari esok benar-benar membawa sinar baru untuk negara kita Malaysia. Merdeka!

Ivory tower 'internment'

Amending the Universities and University Colleges Act will not produce independent-minded graduates. It is better to do away with the leash altogether.

In the last column, we discussed the proposed amendments to the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA), in particular amendments regarding the establishment of a committee to select the vice-chancellor (VC). This week, we shall look at the changes the Bill proposes for students.

The first question that comes to mind is: Are these changes an improvement? The answer: Yes, they are. But then it’s not difficult to improve on a law as awful as the UUCA.

The real question should be: Are these changes going to make a significant change? The answer to that is far less emphatic.

Originally, the Act works on a presumption that students are not allowed to join any group outside the university without the VC’s permission.

The amendment will reverse that presumption so that students can join any group except political parties, illegal groups and any group that the VC deems to be unsuitable.

This is an improvement, but it’s not a huge one. There seems to be little logic in banning students from joining political parties, for example. If we allow students to be part of a political party, are they really going to join in droves?

The most annoying person during my years as a university student in England was a Labour party diehard.

My God, he was an irritant; spouting the party line at the drop of a hat. As far as I know, in my year of a hundred students, he was the only political party member.

The student elections were won every year by independent nominees, and not political party nominees.

Granted, England is different from Malaysia, but I doubt the Malaysian political parties will have too many joining up from the campuses. And even if they did, so what?

“The students will not study,” I hear you say. Listen, if students are dumb enough to let their bunting-hanging activities get in the way of their getting a degree, they will be dumb enough to let anything cause them to flunk. Online gaming, for example.

At the end of the day, they are adults, and they make their own choices. That is what produces mature graduates, those who have lived in an environment where they made their own choices and lived with them.

Furthermore, “illegal organisations” can be bona fide NGOs which have difficulty registering with the Registrar of Societies (and it can be tough getting the ROS’ okay).

And the power given to the VC to “ban any unsuitable organisation” is far too broad and open to abuse.

The restriction on students is made worse by the fact that “student” is defined by the amending Bill to include post-graduate, post-doctorate and external students.

Are you telling me that all these working men and women have to subject their normal activities to the restrictions of the UUCA?

According to the Bill, students are now allowed greater freedom of expression. As long as it is in a properly organised forum like a seminar. And, even then a seminar which is not organised by a political party, illegal group or VC-banned group.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for student autonomy and the freedom of expression.

And, students are not allowed to express support for illegal groups, political parties and VC-banned groups. Why ever not? If a student is just so in love with Umno, why shouldn’t he say so?

He can become really popular. He can be given cute nicknames like Umno Boy or Barisan Kid. “Hey, let’s ask Umno Boy to join us for tea. It will be fun listening to him recite the party manifesto.”

Even illegal groups have their worth. I mean, at one time the African National Congress was illegal. So was Fatah. Imagine if a student was anti-apartheid or anti-Zionist.

If the UUCA had been in existence in those days, he wouldn’t have been able to even verbally support Nelson Mandela or the intifada.

There is also the troubling proposal to allow a student charged with a registrable offence to be suspended from his studies.

Good heavens. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? He was charged, not convicted. There seems to be a serious lack of fairness if he can be punished simply for being accused of an offence, even before he is found to be in the wrong.

At the end of the day, the proposed amendments appear to be a case of wanting your cake and eating it too.

I believe the Government does realise that the UUCA is not a good law, and something has to be done about it. It does not promote academic freedom; it is utterly stifling on the students. However, these amendments show that they are at least theoretically merely lengthening the leash.

If we want independent-minded graduates and universities of excellence, then the leash has to be done away with altogether.

Dr Azmi Sharom is a law teacher. The views expressed here are entirely his own.

food for thoughts (1)

Jika anak itu hidup dengan kritikan
Ia belajar untuk mencela

Jika anak itu hidup dengan kekasaran
Ia belajar untuk menentang

Jika anak itu hidup dengan belaian kasih
Ia belajar untuk merendah diri

Jika anak itu hidup dalam suasana yang iri hati
Ia belajar untuk merasa bersalah

Jika anak itu hidup dengan toleransi
Ia belajar untuk bersabar

Jika anak itu hidup dengan galakan
Ia belajar untuk berkeyakinan

Jika anak itu hidup dengan pujian
Ia belajar untuk menghargai

Jika anak itu hidup dengan saksama
Ia belajar untuk berlaku adil

Jika anak itu hidup dengan kerelaan
Ia belajar menyayangi

Jika anak itu hidup dalam restu
Ia belajar menyukai dirinya

Jika anak itu hidup dengan penghargaan
Ia belajar mempunyai matlamat

Jika anak itu hidup dengan kejujuran
Ia belajar apa itu keadilan

Jika anak itu hidup dalam keikhlasan
Ia belajar apa itu kebenaran

Jika anak itu hidup dalam keselamatan
Ia belajar yakin diri dengan orang di sekelilingnya

Jika anak itu hidup dalam keramah-tamahan
Ia belajar bahawa dunia ialah

Tempat yang baik untuk hidup

Sayangilah mereka
Kerana pada suatu masa nanti

Perjuangan ini akan diteruskan oleh mereka
Dunia ini akan diwarisi oleh mereka...

mayday for justice system

Agak menarik mengikuti perkembangan negara baru-baru ini. Saiful Bukhari Azlan yang mendakwa diliwat oleh Datuk Seri Anwar telah bersumpah dengan Kitab Suci Al-Qur'an di Masjid Wilayah Persekutuan dengan disaksikan oleh pegawai masjid, orang awam dan para petugas media.

Mengikuti perkembangan kes ini sejak ia bermula menimbulkan banyak persoalan dalam diri saya. Bagaimana seorang anak muda yang mempunyai masa depan yang cerah telah menjerumuskan diri dalam lembah kehinaan dan menjadi buah mulut bukan sahaja rakyat Malaysia bahkan masyarakat dunia. Saiful sememangnya anak muda yang berani. Berani mendapatkan keadilan buat dirinya dan berani juga untuk dicemuh oleh sebahagian manusia yang sangsi dan ragu dengan pengakuan yang dibuat oleh dirinya.

Saya tidak berminat untuk mengetahui lebih lanjut tentang Saiful. Saya cuma ingin tegaskan di sini bahawa sumpah yang dibuat oleh Saiful baru-baru ini adalah satu tragedi memilukan bagi sistem keadilan dan perundangan di Malaysia.

Bersumpah menggunakan Al-Qur'an seperti yang dinyatakan oleh majoriti ulama' sememangnya tidak wujud dalam ajaran Islam. Tidak tahu daripada mana masyarakat Islam khususnya di Malaysia memperolehi sumber tentang ajaran bersumpah dengan Al-Qur'an ini. Mungkin terikut-ikut dengan cara Ustazah Rafidah Aziz bersumpah satu ketika dahulu ketika mana beliau menafikan terlibat dalam skandal AP beribu-ribu melibatkan anak menantu.

Bahkan ingin ditegaskan juga bahawa di dalam prosedur pembuktian Islam , sumpah hanya dibuat oleh pihak yang dituduh dan bukannya pihak yang menuduh. Ini diterangkan dalam prinsip "Al-Bayyinah a'la al-muddaa'ii wal Yamiinu a'la man Ankara' yang bermaksud "Beban BUKTI adalah pada yang menuduh dan SUMPAH pula adalah pada yang dituduh".

Ini bermaksud dalam kes ini yang perlu bersumpah adalah Datuk Seri Anwar sendiri dan bukan nya Saiful. Saiful hanya perlu membuktikan dengan pembuktian bahawa dirinya benar-benar telah diliwat oleh Datuk Seri Anwar. Malahan pembuktian itu mestilah dilakukan di dalam mahkamah dan bukannya di tempat awam seperti mana yang dilakukan baru-baru ini.

Perbuatan Saiful bersumpah sedemikian sangatlah memalukan dan terang-terangan menjatuhkan kredibiliti sistem keadilan Malaysia di mata dunia. Bahkan baru-baru ini ketika saya membaca sebuah akhbar harian seorang pembaca menyatakan bahawa sekiranya SUMPAH adalah satu cara untuk memutuskan samaada seseorang itu bersalah atau tidak maka apa gunanya lagi kita mempunyai pendakwaraya, peguam dan mahkamah! Lebih baik seseorang penjenayah itu bersumpah sahaja untuk membuktikan dirinya bersalah atau tidak!

Situasi ini sangat mengelirukan dan mula dijadikan bahan mainan dan pojokan (mockery). Masyarakat umumnya telah hilang kepercayaan kepada sistem keadilan dan lebih menyedihkan lagi ia menjadi bahan ketawa dan permainan. Di manakah semangat 'keluhuran perlembagaan' dan 'kedaulatan undang-undang' seperti mana yang tercatat dalam Rukun Negara itu berada pada hari ini. Adakah kita hanya melihat keindahan pelaksanaannya pada bahagian belakang buku latihan budak Sekolah Kebangsaan (SK) sahaja!

Di manakah pula suara para pencinta dan pengamal undang-undang khususnya para hakim dan peguam untuk mempertahankan integriti dan kredibiliti sistem keadilan negara kita yang kini berada di tahap ICU? Apakah makna kita membina 'Istana Kehakiman' di Putrajaya dan "Kompleks Mahkamah" di Jalan Duta yang begitu gah dan tersergam indah sekiranya masyarakat hari ini mula hilang kepercayaan dan ragu-ragu terhadap sistem keadilan di negara kita.

Hanya kerana Saiful Bukhari dan juak-juak di belakangnya maka impian kita untuk melihat pembaharuan dalam sistem keadilan dari kehakiman dan perundangan seperti yang diusahakan sesetengah pihak hancur lebur. Ini diburukkan lagi dengan faktor sosio-ekonomi semasa yang menunjukkan bahawa Malaysia bukan menuju kepada Wawasan 2020 tetapi Wawasan 2-2-0 (dua-dua kosong), dunia - akhirat 2-2 kosong!

Jangan kata-kata seorang teman rapat saya ini benar-benar menjadi kenyataan;

Singapore future is technology,
Indonesia future is economy,
Malaysia future is SODOMY!!!

looking for a statesman

good luck for three of you, guys

we want a true leader for our beloved country, Malaysia.

rotten root breeds rotten fruit

I would refrain myself from generalizing the whole UiTM as being useless, although I surmise, not opening and accepting Malaysians of other races will eventually depress the standard and quality of education over the country.

We need world class universities but it doesn't be reflected by our action and conduct. We always put the political interest first rather than thinking about future generations who will take a lead of this country. We spoon-feeding them with ingredients so that they will just simply blindly follows or be a half-past six yes man.

Let us forget about this marching. We completely knew this as there was somebody in the veil who forced them to be man on the street. They are used as puppets or somehow rather be victimised.

Personally speaking, I think our nation has been screwed so badly after years. A lot of us loose the capability to act maturely. I know it will take a long time to heal completely, but I believe that with determination we will get there one day.

There is no issue of disparity between races here. We live as one nation. I believe new young Malays are brave enough to compete with others. We don't afraid to play on a level playing field.

We urge the government of the day to instill the competitiveness in the Higher Institutions of Learning. No more privileges to demand for. No more Tongkat. We are independent.

We advocates for openness and the spirit of challenging without politics being in the way. We want all these primarily because we hate the word 'Ketuanan Melayu' even though this was enshrined by Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.

We are now able to compete and beat Chinese, Indian, American, Russian and the rest of the world. and therefore we speak English pretty damn well!

We worked together side by side to build this country irrespective of races.

Please set aside all these privileges. This is the first way of light for the dawn of this new era.

desire creates power

It does not matter where you come from

Or what odds are against you

What does matter is that you want to succeed in whatever you are pursuing

That is the secret

Not power, Not fate, Not chance

Your burning desire will drive you

On whatever it takes

Keep you going through all the odds

Do whatever it takes

Desire the impossible

Feels the intangible and achieves the impossible

Desire creates power!

~real technocrats never quit

deeply from heart

Mengunakan suara yang kuat untuk mengancam, bukan bijak. Ianya menunjukkan kita tidak konfiden untuk menangani isu yang mengelirukan. Sepatutnya kita berbincang dengan cara yang intelektual. Sepatutnya kita guna peluang ini untuk membuktikan bahawa Islam adalah adil. Bukan guna kekuatan dan ugutan kekerasan untuk menang.

Islam yang sebenar benarnya mengutamakan keamanan, dan tidak pernah mengalakkan keganasan. Saya rasa amat malu kerana ugama Islam saya telah tercemar, bukan oleh Badan Peguam, tetapi oleh pemprotes pemprotes yang mengakui diri mereka sebagai Islam tetapi sebaliknya menganjurkan perangai tidak menghormati orang lain, dan juga sikap ganas dan keterlaluan.

-Nik Elin Zurina Bt Nik Abdul Rashid

please read: Muslim lawyers must engage intellectually with non-muslims

Until when we are going to face all these? After 50 years of independent, we still living without trusting each other. Come on my Muslim fellows, be matured enough and engage with them to make them understand. Do not be swayed by those who always seek their political mileage. Be honest. We are living as one nation right?

being passionate for justice

hassle-free to read here

varsities in perplexity

©The Star (Used by permission)
Brave New World by Azmi Sharom

A vice chancellor must understand the needs of academia. Merit has to be the paramount factor when hiring, firing and promoting.

OVER the years I have said many times (to any unfortunate soul listening) that two of the root causes of the poor state of Malaysian public universities are the appointment method of vice chancellors (VC) and the utter repression of our students.

Both matters are dealt with by the Universities and University Colleges Act. For about two years now there has been talk about this Act being amended. The amending Bill is finally ready and waits to be debated in parliament.

For this week, let’s look at the appointment of the VC. The choice of a VC is terribly important. They set the tone for the university and they can do much inside the institution to improve things, even within the limitations of Malaysian law and politics.

A VC has to have excellent managerial skills because it’s hard to think of a more unmanageable group of people than academics. They tend to be argumentative and questioning; at least those who understand that, as academics, they should be argumentative and questioning.

A good manager, however, does not mean a bureaucrat. A university can only thrive when there are as few bureaucratic obstacles as possible. A person enamoured by forms and the filling of forms, and who thinks this is the way to achieve academic excellence, should work for Sirim instead.

VCs must also be fairly presentable creatures as they, more often than not, represent their institution. By this I mean well spoken, intelligible and not parochial. I don’t mean they have to be handsome or pretty. That would make it hard to find anyone.

Finally, and most importantly, a VC must understand the needs of academia. Merit has got to be the paramount factor when hiring, firing and promoting (please don’t write angry emails about student intake and merit, it is out of the university’s hands – at least for now).

Academic standards must not be compromised for any reason and academic integrity (no cutting and pasting from the net and claiming it’s your work, thank you) must be the ethos to live by.

VCs must truly appreciate academic and intellectual freedom. They must realise that due to its nature a university must promote the autonomy of both the individual and the institution.

A simple example is that the needs of a humanities department are extremely different from the needs of a science department. As such, they require the autonomy to decide what is best for them. In universities, one size, most definitely, does not fit all.

A VC must thus respect the freedom of those working and studying in the university and must be courageous enough to stand up against any threat that challenges the very values that is required for a university to be good.

It’s not easy, especially with a government like ours, but this must be done and done in real terms, not just lip service.

The law as it stands states that the VC is chosen by the Higher Education Minister after consultation with the university’s board. The Bill proposes that an ad hoc committee be set up when necessary to advice the minister in the choice of VC.

This is indeed an improvement on the old method, which gave total discretion to the minister and which led to appointments being made, more often than not, on the political correctness of the candidate (and here I mean he or she supports the correct political party).

However, I’m not all that convinced about this new set-up either.

The minister is the one who appoints the committee, and therefore is he likely to choose a group of people who don’t at the very least think along the same lines as he does? Will their advice be “politically correct”?

The committee looks very much like a search committee. This is the method that universities in developed parts of the world use to find a VC.

A true search committee is appointed by the university’s board, and opens the call for applications to anyone interested. It could be limited to the country or it could be open to the world.

There is a criterion which the committee must adhere to when sifting through the potential candidates, usually based around the qualities I mentioned earlier.

It then makes a shortlist and calls for interviews. Some universities involve the student body and the staff union in the interview. After this process it makes its recommendation to the board.

There is no government participation, and therefore no political criterion is involved, only academic and managerial. All this is done in an open and transparent manner which can be scrutinised by all.

Obviously, this is not the case with the suggested committee on the Act. There are still many unanswered questions with regard to it. Its make-up is just one.

What is the criterion it is to use in seeking a VC; will the search be based on an open call or will it be a matter of making a short list on its own?

None of these concerns are dealt with in the Bill, so forgive me if I am not dancing around with joy at this “improvement”. We still have to see how the committee works in practice before we get excited.

At least the explanatory notes to the Bill explain that the purpose of having a committee is to make the process more transparent.

That is something the academic community should hold the ministry to, and we should demand that the committee’s decision-making process is as open as possible and we should then scrutinise its activities (if the amendment Bill is passed) with eagle eyes.

For the next column, I shall discuss the implications of the amendment on students. And examine if the proposed changes will actually make much difference to their repressed little lives.

Dr Azmi Sharom is a law teacher. The views expressed here are entirely his own.

rejuvenating young minds

©The Star (Used by permission)
Reflecting On The Law by Shad Saleem Faruqi

The spirit of the law is one of evolutionary change towards more open, free and democratic campuses.

AFTER a gestation period of nearly two years, the long-awaited amendments to The Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 are finally before Parliament.

Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin deserves congratulations, in that immediately after assuming the mantle of leadership at the ministry, he set ambitious time-schedules, tackled some lingering, tough issues with aplomb and, with a very short notice, succeeded in placing the Bill before the Cabinet and Parliament.

As with all laws, the amendments are full of negotiated compromises. There is a mixture of idealism and pragmatism. Though there is some understandable caution, a lot of risks are being taken to trust the young with rights and freedoms hitherto unknown.

The spirit of the law is one of evolutionary change towards more open, free and democratic campuses. Of course, the critics will find many flaws. But there is something worthwhile for everyone in the proposals.

Consultative processes: The Amendment puts in place a number of democratic consultative processes as a pre-condition to the making of decisions on key university appointments.

The minister, in appointing the chairman and members of the board of directors, the Vice-Chancellor, Deputy Vice-Chancellors and directors of campuses, will now have to consult with a committee.

The Vice-Chancellor in appointing deans and heads will be obliged to hear out the faculty members. In addition, he will have to inform the board of his choices. All this should promote more transparency and more quality appointments.

Good governance: University autonomy is improved by transferring some ministerial powers to the university’s board of directors. For example, student discipline appeals, at present heard by the minister, shall now be heard by a committee of the university’s board.

The Amendment demarcates clearly the powers and functions of the board, the senate and the Vice-Chancellor. But if any jurisdictional dispute still arises there is in place a non-judicial dispute resolution mechanism.

Hitherto, the university senate’s powers were subordinate to that of the board. The Amendment changes this. The role of the university senate as the primary academic body of the university is strengthened.

On academic matters, the board can transmit its opinions to the senate. But the senate will have the final say.

Staff welfare: Employees with grievances can file appeals with the board on matters of appointment, renewal and promotion.

The minister is now authorised, on the application of a requesting organisation, to allow a consenting university employee to be seconded or transferred to another institution if that would serve the national interest in education and research.

This should facilitate greater sharing of expertise.

Democratic representation: At present, the Vice-Chancellor appoints 20 professors to the senate. The Amendment empowers professors and associate professors to elect 20 of their colleagues to the university’s senate.

In addition, it charts a new course by permitting a senior academician to sit on the board of directors. The university’s senate is empowered to nominate one of its elected senators to the board of directors to represent the academic perspective and to provide a link between the senate and the board.

There will now be an employee welfare committee of the board and employee association representatives shall be members of this committee. Likewise, student representatives shall have membership on the board’s student welfare committee.

Student rights: In a break with the past the new law reflects confidence in our students’ growing maturity to handle freedoms. Educationists have always known that young people can become whatever we expect them to become. The height of their achievement is often determined by the trust reposed in them.

The Act recognises students’ constitutional right to speech and association. In their individual as well as collective capacities, students will now be free to join youth and social organisations and non-governmental organisations. Unlike as at present, they will require nobody’s prior permission to make these affiliations.

However, on the authority of the Federal Constitution’s Article 10(3), which permits restrictions on freedom of association in the field of education, students are still forbidden from membership of political parties, unlawful organisation and any group that the minister has declared to be unsuitable for student affiliation.

However, serving politicians and working adults who enrol at universities to further their education may seek exemption from the Vice-Chancellor to be allowed to continue their political affiliation.

These provisions will, undoubtedly, be criticised. But what must be noted is that a sea change has indeed taken place.

Previously students could not join any outside organisation unless they made a formal application, which could be approved or refused at discretion.

Now, freedom is inherent. No prior permission is needed. Everything is permitted unless it is prohibited.

Previously, everything was prohibited unless it was expressly permitted!

The Amendment enlarges the space for free speech for academic research and comment. It permits student interaction with outside organisations, politicians and political parties on academic occasions.

The right to participate in student democracy and to dabble in student politics as a training ground for future participation in national politics is preserved.

The Amendment protects student organisations by surrounding the power of the Vice-Chancellor to suspend or dissolve a student organisation with procedural safeguards and permitting an appeal to the minister.

The new law de-criminalises the Act by replacing all criminal sanctions with disciplinary penalties.

It removes provisions for automatic suspension or expulsion of a student who is charged with a criminal offence or who is convicted, or who is detained or restricted under preventive detention and restricted residence laws.

The university is given discretion to handle these cases as it sees fit, depending on whether the offence is a registrable criminal offence or a minor offence unrelated to academic character.

The Amendment removes provisions that provide for presumption of guilt, criminal liability even without conviction and collective criminal liability of office bearers of student organisations.

It safeguards the fundamental right to education by providing that a student who is acquitted of a charge in a court of law has a right to return to the university.

If he was excluded from a public university he has a right to enrol in a private institution or, with the permission of the minister, in any other public university.

Extensive changes have been made to provide for fairer student disciplinary procedures. The grounds on which the university may revoke a student’s degree or diploma have been reduced and this exceptional power has been surrounded with procedural safeguards.

The electorate for student elections has been expanded by enfranchising post-graduate students.

Hopefully there is something in the amendment for every sector of the university community.

Dr Shad Faruqi is Professor of Law at UiTM

dishonour to the nation

I heard from someone about this. Our 'Jalur Gemilang' was put upside down. The flag which reflects our national dignity was displayed as such simply because it is a sign of distress.

No matter what ever reason behind all these, the national flag belongs to the people. It is not something that we can mess with it.

Yes, we are a nation in distress, but we have not given up all hopes. To some people probably this might cause more stressful.

It's a pride of the nation. Please leave it as it is.

Sometimes it is not good to follow everything we seen from the .net, kan?

mind your own business

For someone who is so bother talking about others business.

Let's mind your own business.

It's res judicata. I rest my case.

guinea pigs in dilemma

Billions of ringgit spent on courseware and teaching aids will be wasted if the Education Ministry decides to revoke the policy of teaching Maths and Science in English ...

I am not pretending to be hypocrites here. Amidst of this dilemma, I strongly advocates this matter as regards to teaching Maths and Science in English is essential and important. In a long term mission we wants our future Malaysian to be well versed in English. No matter how misery it is, we must adhere that we are going no where without English proficiency.

As National Union of Teaching Profession secretary-general Lok Yim Pheng puts it in stark perspective: "It will be extremely painful for everyone. Billions of ringgit would have been wasted in teacher training, reprinting textbooks, and formulating courseware and teaching aids. It would all have been a sheer waste of money and time."

Yes. Turning back or to reversion would be wasted tax-payer money and there will be much complication that apparently put teachers and school administration in a mess. The Government particularly Ministry of Education must stick on this matter and trying to recover the loopholes as far as possible they can do.

Everybody knows that this is not a matter of ridiculous or a mockery. It would neither a political ambitious nor trying to get a sympathy from the Rakyat. This is all about the sake of our future generation who will running this country for years ahead. I hope our Education Minister will consider all these prudently and diligently.

Please do not put six years of hard work going practically "down the drain". Cheers.

read more here...

perlukah aku menjaga hati [republished]

my apology..this article is written in Bahasa..as requested by someone close to me.

Tamat sudah program Kem Nuqaba’ di Sekolah Menengah Sains Tuanku Jaafar, Kuala Pilah. Selepas makan tengah hari di rumah makcik Luqman di Bahau, hantar shukri ke bus stand Bahau-aku terus bergegas ke rumah. Kemaskan barang, mandi, solat, cium tangan mak & abah lalu bergerak untuk kembali ke Kuala Lumpur.

Dalam perjalanan itu tiba2 hati ini terasa hiba dan sayu. Tidak tahu kenapa sejak kebelakangan ini hatiku berasa begitu sayu. Mungkin selepas mak menelefon aku saat program tengah berlangsung memberitahu abah demam panas. Hatiku berasa tidak tenteram, gundah meskipun slot LDK pada waktu itu belum lagi selesai. Aku terpaksa pulang segera memandang hanya aku yang boleh diharapkan ketika itu- abang dan kakakku tidak pulang ke kampung. Tugas sebagai ketua Fasi aku serahkan pada adikku Taufiq.

Aku sampai ke rumah dan lihat abah tidur di atas sofa. Aku beri salam dan rasa tangan dan kepala abah. Memang agak panas. Aku segera tukar pakaian dan abah bersiap untuk pergi ke klinik. Inilah kali pertama aku hantar abah ke klinik. Sebelum ini aku yang dihantar ke klinik oleh abah. Meskipun kini aku seharusnya sedar bahawa aku telah meningkat dewasa. Kini aku memang patut memikul tanggungjawab terhadap kedua mak dan abah yang semakin meningkat usia. Anak bujang abah ini rupanya sedang bertatih untuk menjadi pemimpin keluarga.

Memang bercerita tentang ibu dan ayah sesekali mampu membuatkan kita menitis air mata. Setiap kali ada yang bercerita tentang mereka, aku percaya itulah satu saat dan ketika yang mampu buatkan kita tersenyum dan tertawa. Benar ada 1001 kisah antara kita dan mereka. Pengorbanan mereka, kasih sayang mereka mahupun doa mereka adalah perkara yang tidak dapat kita balas dengan wang ringgit ataupun kemewahan.

Aku hanya mahu berbakti kepada mereka sewaktu mereka masih berada di sisi. Aku tak mahu kehilangan mereka di waktu aku masih belum buktikan bahawa anak lelaki mereka yang berjaya. Jika boleh aku ingin menjadi anak bujang mereka yang lambat kahwin, kaya raya serta mampu memberikan doa yang baik kepada mereka.

Terkenang peristiwa dahulu sewaktu aku mendapat 4A dalam UPSR sekaligus menjadi pelajar mithali sekolah ,abah memeluk aku sambil mengucapkan tahniah. Pada waktu itulah aku dapat rasakan kasih sayang abah yang sebenarnya. Kehangatan pelukan itu 12 tahun dahulu masih aku rasakan sehingga kini. Pada waktu itu, hadiah basikal BMX hijau bukanlah satu yang aku begitu dambakan, tetapi cukuplah perhatian dan kasih sayang, itu adalah lebih bermakna daripada segala-galanya.

Pernah suatu hari aku terbaca diari abah di atas meja pejabatnya. Ternyata abah punya rancangan keluarga yang sangat terperinci dan sempurna. Yang paling aku ingati ialah abah mengharapkan agar kesemua anak-anak nya akan dihantar ke Insititusi Pengajian Tinggi. Ternyata harapan dan doa abah itu maqbul kerana kami semua 6 beradik semuanya ke university. Abah sseorang yang sangat teliti dalam soal perancangan dan perbelanjaan keluarga, bahkan abah punya rancangan masa depan yang begitu jelas.

Harapan abah untuk memiliki sebuah rumah batu yang selesa kini menjadi kenyataan berbanding rumah kayu yang diduduki sejak mula menyertai rancangan FELDA Pasoh pada tahun 1975 dahulu. Sayangnya aku tak terlalu merasai keperitan itu kerana aku dilahirkan dengan penuh kesenangan dan dimanjakan...

Adakalanya ketika bersendirian aku terfikir..mampukah aku menjadi seorang lelaki sehebat abah? Seorang Imam pada masyarakat sekelilingnya, seorang suami yang mengambil berat ,seorang ayah yang tidak pernah mengeluh dan kalah pada masalah, seorang hamba Allah yang tidak pernah lalai meninggalkan kewajipan fardhunya.

Bolehkah aku menjadi seorang suami yang baik yang boleh membimbing dan menjadi contoh tauladan pada isteri dan anak2ku nanti. Perlukah aku fikirkan semua itu di saat rakan-rakanku kini seorang demi seorang menamatkan zaman bujang mereka? Bolehkah aku mewarisi segala sifat mulia yang ada pada diri abah?

Perasaan itu membuatkan aku berasa takut untuk menempuhi alam rumah tangga yang penuh cabaran itu.. Perasaan membawa hati ini melayang jauh daripada tanggungjawab yang maha hebat dan berat itu.......

Ya Allah teguhkanlah hati ini menerima ketentuanMu!....