Malaysian History X: The Chronicles Of UUCA And Student Activism

“...Laws are not necessary when people maintain peace voluntarily. But when people anywhere are unable to keep the peace, then laws have to be made to enforce peace...A government would be failing in its duty, in particular a democratically elected Government, if it does not oversee the usage of public property and public money. Hence the laws relating to the Universities and University Colleges...”[1]

by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, 1975

The words above were uttered by the then Minister of Education, Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad when he proposed to pass the amendment bill to the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA) in 1975, an amendment that would eventually cause seismic and everlasting effects to both student activism and universities’ autonomy in Malaysia. To better understand why the UUCA, especially the post-1975 UUCA, was so despised over the years, one needs to recognise student movements prior to the UUCA era.

60s and 70s: The Heyday of Student Movement

Back in the 60s and early 70s, under an autonomous university environment, the students’ associations and unions were encouraged to self-manage their own students’ affairs and welfare. The student unions back then were empowered to operate, on their own initiative, services such as dental care, clinics, buses, cafeterias and canteens.[2] Debates or symposiums were often held around the famed Speakers’ Corner, where social issues such as poverty, civil rights and race were open for intellectual discourse.

It was around the mid-60s when student movements were on the rise. Not limiting their concern of social issues to mere intellectual debates, the students engaged in mass demonstrations to make their voices heard. A good example was the Teluk Gong Struggle in 1967, involving class fights between landless peasants and the Government. The peasants cleared forests and built houses on the Teluk Gong region but soon after these efforts, their houses and crops were demolished by the Government on the ground of illegality, and the peasants were also evicted, with some arrested at the same time. The Government’s harsh actions were met with revolt led by prominent student unions at that time, such as the University of Malaya Student Union (UMSU) and the University of Malaya Malay Language Society (PBMUM).[3] The pressure exerted from the students’ demonstrations were so successful that not only the arrested peasants were released, the then Selangor state government was compelled to revise its land distribution policy to take rural poverty into consideration.[4]

In 1969, months before the 3rd General Election (GE), student unions including the UMSU organised 13 rallies across the country, championing for democracy, social justice, land reform and calls for the unconditional release of political detainees. The rallies received overwhelming support from the public, achieving a total attendance of more than 100,000 people. Interestingly, out of the 13 Parliament constituencies rallied in by the students, 9 would eventually be captured by the Opposition during the 3rd GE.[5] More astoundingly, after the May 13 incident, the eventual resignation of Tunku Abdul Rahman from the Prime Ministership was also attributed to the anti-Tunku campaign advocated by UMSU and PBMUM (whose leader was then UM student Anwar Ibrahim).[6]

Government Response: The UUCA

Against such a background of constant demonstrations and student activism, Mr. Hussein Onn who was the Minister of Education at that time, introduced the UUCA. However, the disputed provisions that made the UUCA not welcomed and fiercely protested against by the students were Sections 15 and 16, where the UUCA prohibited student groups from affiliating with, and also from expressing support, opposition or sympathy towards any political party, trade union or any unlawful group of individuals. Undeterred by the UUCA, the students marched on, with demonstrations after demonstrations voicing for the rural poor in Tasek Utara, Baling and Kuala Lumpur; sometimes leading to the arrest of student protesters. Specifically, after the arrests of student protesters in Tasek Utara in 1974, UMSU was galvanized to initiate an emergency meeting which eventually took over the administration of UM.[7] Such an incident, even after the implementation of UUCA, was akin to the straw that broke the camel’s back for the Government.

In 1975, the Minister of Education at that time Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, introduced the Amendment Act A295 to revamp the UUCA in terms of student movements. If Tun Hussein’s version of UUCA was on the brink of violating students’ rights under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution (“FC”), then Dr. Mahathir’s amendments to the UCCA could be deemed as a complete trammel over such rights, making Article 10 virtually non-existent to students. Under the amendments, individual students were not allowed to join any organisations or groups of persons without the permission of the Vice-Chancellor, and students were prohibited from expressing anything related to any political party. Any breaching of these provisions would attract criminal liability;[8] and student organisations established under the Societies Act 1966 were to be dissolved immediately.[9] Students charged with any criminal offence would be suspended and if convicted,be expelled from the university,[10] and many other restrictions formed the backbone of these amendments.

In the name of public order and morality, Dr. Mahathir justified his proposal by contending that due to student activism that attracted police forces for action, the country’s security against recurring Communist threats had been indirectly loosened, and worse still, some student movements may have already been infiltrated with Communist influence.[11] There was force in his argument when he also said, inter alia, that public (taxpayer) money in universities was wasted when students were more interested in demonstrations than their studies, especially in the context that Malaysia was rather young back in the 70s, and the country desperately needed high quality human capital for nation building.[12]

Despite a fierce debate and challenges against the amendments from Opposition representatives in the likes of Lim Kit Siang and Dr. Tan Chee Khoon (who was a Chairman of the UM University Council), and even with some minor dissent from the Government MPs, Act A295 was bulldozed through Parliament. The effect of the amendments was to strike fear upon students, warning them that there would be a high price to pay for their rebellion.[13] In hindsight, it is undeniable that student activism back then, with their strong anti-Establishment sentiment and persistent efforts in championing for social issues, had somehow become a threatening force that the ruling Government could not afford to overlook. The 1975 amendment marks the end of the ‘Golden Age’ of student movements and the state of law remained largely unchanged over the next few decades.

Post 2009: Revival of Students’ Rights?

After decades of subdue, the UUCA underwent another major amendment in the year 2009, by allowing students to associate with organisations, except political parties or organisations banned by the university authorities. However, a more significant milestone was achieved by the amendments done in 2012. The much disputed S. 15 was again amended and finally for the first time ever, UUCA positively allowed individual students to join political parties, and students were free to engage in intellectual discourse over political topics within campus, on the condition that there will be no involvement in political activities in campus.[14] Such a shift in stance is in no small way consequent to a 2011 landmark Court of Appeal decision of Muhammad Hilman v Kerajaan Malaysia,[15] (UKM 4 case) where Hishamudin Mohd Yunus JCA in no unequivocal terms, held that banning university students, who are competent and mature, from being affiliated with politics is unconstitutional and irrational; and limiting students’ open discourse over politics is just counterproductive and would only produce students trained as robots. His Lordship even held that there is simply no sufficient nexus between public order and morality and the need to suppress students’ rights to freely associate with politics.

The Court of Appeal was correct in pointing out that universities should serve as the breeding ground for reformers and thinkers because the time in university may be the only period where students attaining a sufficient level of consciousness and maturity, are unrestrained and free from the ordinary ordeals of working adults, and can therefore fully indulge themselves within causes they believe in. That is why we see that student movements across the globe, when yielded properly, could unleash major societal impact. Malaysia has had its fair share of student activism back in the early days, albeit some ended in chaotic ways, but it signified the passion and idealism of youth to advance for a better nation. The UUCA is now no longer the much-deplored Act but some of its previous provisions may have caused irreversible effects upon students, especially in terms of active political awareness and participation in social causes. Adding this with the age of digital and information boom that we are in, there is simply too much for the youth to care about, and how much attention is there left for the public affairs of the country?

Click here for footnotes