UM8 can win if they go to court, say student activists
The Universiti Malaya (UM) students who have been punished for organising a campus talk featuring Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim should take their case to court as they have a good chance of winning, former student leaders said, citing unfair implementation of a law that governs student participation in politics.
The UM8, as they have been dubbed, also have a strong case on the basis of another case involving four Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia students (UKM4) who challenged their university over their alleged participation in a 2010 by-election campaign and won.
"I believe if the UM8 bring this case to court, there is an opportunity for them to win," former student activist Safwan Anang said, and referred to the UKM4 who had gone to observe the Hulu Selangor by-election campaign and were arrested after political leaflets were found in their possession.
The four UKM students took their case to the High Court and also faced their university's disciplinary panel, which acquitted them of any wrongdoing under the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) 1971. They also challenged the constitutionality of the act.
The act was amended in 2012 to allow student participation in politics, and the key driver of this push was then deputy higher education minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah. But the law still regulates the organisation of political events on campus.
However, Safwan said the act was now being used to restrict activism and was being applied selectively.
"The problem now is that not only do they use the act to restrict activism but to restrict students who are seen to be pro-opposition," he told The Malaysian Insider.
Safwan said there were "double standards" in universities' implementation of the UUCA as no action was taken against students who joined and got directly involved with the recently concluded Umno general assembly.
"When you are on the government's side, it is allowed, but with the opposition, you can't," he said.
On this basis, Safwan said he believed former UM student union leader Fahmi Zainol and the others in the UM8 would have a case if they brought the disciplinary action against them to court.
The eight were responsible for organising the October 27 talk on campus that featured Anwar, the opposition leader.
One of the eight has had charges dropped against him, but the remaining seven have been slapped with fines, and in the case of Fahmi and Safwan Shamsuddin, suspensions of two months and one month, respectively.
Safwan said the reason behind the immediate suspension of both students was to create fear in other students.
"The decision has crossed a line, but it will only make students see how oppressive and undemocratic the university management is towards their own students.”
Safwan said it was not a matter of the supporting opposition but giving students the opportunity to observe national politics first-hand so that they could make their own decisions.
"For me, that is part of democracy. (The UM8) have the right to invite anyone. When they invite an opposition figure, action is taken against them. But when government or Umno people are invited, no action is taken."
A little-mentioned fact, Safwan said, was that before Fahmi had invited Anwar to speak, an invitation had also been extended to Youth and Sports Minister Khairy Jamaluddin while Fahmi was on the Convocation Festival Committee.
"But Khairy didn’t want to come. It shows students had tried to invite the ministry's representative."
Echoing the sentiment was Persatuan Mahasiswa UKM (PMUKM) president Muhammad Sallehudin Khalid, who urged the UM8 to bring their case to court.
"The recent decision by UM's administrators is not aligned with the spirit of Article 10 of the Federal Constitution, the amendment of the UUCA and the UKM4 case.
"This incident is happening after the amendment of the UUCA in 2012 and the UKM4 case. It creates a stigma on other students about student activism," he said adding that the amendment of UUCA and the decision on the UKM4 had been progressive moves for the country.
Sallehudin agreed that the UUCA was used selectively to allow politicians from the ruling coalition to speak at university programmes.
"That Anwar Ibrahim should not be allowed to give a speech in his capacity as a politician is irrelevant," he added.
Another student activist, Adam Adli, saw the UM8 case as a means to create fear in other students.
"Their intention to punish them is to make other students feel afraid and retreat, but they do not realise that the more they press the students, the more students will fight.
"This action shows that the intervention of politics in university management had caused many students to become victims, just because they try to take political action in the space of democracy."
Adam added that the decision showed how immature the government was in handling this kind of case.
He said students should continue to press for the UUCA to be abolished.
Secretary of international affairs of Malaysian Youth and Students' Democratic Movement, Lau Yi Leong said students should not be subjected to laws like the UUCA.
"(As) normal citizens have rights under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution (on freedom of speech, movement and assembly), so should students," Lau said. – December 11, 2014.
