The United Kingdom & Eire Malaysian Law Students’ Union (KPUM) condemns the suspension of student, Asheeq Ali, by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) for his participation in the 2016 TangkapMO1 rally. We strongly believe that all Malaysians, including students, are afforded the freedom of speech, assembly and association under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. We call upon the university to lift the suspension on Asheeq immediately.

Background

On the 29 September 2016, Asheeq was requested by the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) administration to submit a show cause letter explaining his involvement in the TangkapMO1 rally which took place on 27 August 2016. Upon the submission of his show cause letter, he was summoned to a disciplinary proceeding due to take place on 15 November 2016. Prior to the disciplinary proceeding, Asheeq had filed an injunction against it to the court. The court hearing was scheduled to take place on 1 December 2016.
*
Despite the filling of injunction, the disciplinary hearing took place on 15 November 2016 in which Asheeq received a one-semester suspension and a RM200 fine. The reason for the decision was that he had embarrassed the university and had committed an offence under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 by participating in an illegal rally. Asheeq appealed the decision.
 *
After being suspended for 3 weeks, Asheeq was called to resume his studies while waiting for his appeal to be heard. His appeal was heard by the university board without his knowledge on 11 January 2017 and decided to put Asheeq on a one-month suspension with a RM200 fine. However, the sentence was put on hold pending court proceedings.
Asheeq filed a suit seeking a declaration against UKM that Section 15 (3) of the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) and Rules 3 & 13 of UKM Disciplinary Rules 1999 were unconstitutional for preventing students from expressing their thoughts freely.
 *
On 19 April 2017, UKM had attempted to seek RM50,000 as security costs from Asheeq as the university was concerned that he would be unable to pay the costs if he loses the main suit. However, UKM’s bid was dismissed by the High Court.
 *
On 28 August 2017, the High Court dismissed the suit, ruling that Section 15(3) of the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) and the UKM disciplinary rules do not violate the students’ constitutional rights to assemble. Asheeq appealed the decision but to no avail, as it was also dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 22 February 2018. Following his failure to challenge the university’s decision in court, Asheeq currently faces a one-month suspension.
*

Asheeq’s case demonstrates the extensive restriction of freedom under University and University Colleges Act (‘UUCA’) 1971.
*

The University and University Colleges Act 1971 sets out the establishment, maintenance and administration and other matters related to university and university colleges. Under the UUCA, university and university college boards are also empowered to set out their own rules and regulations on the functioning of their institutions.
Despite the 2012 amendment which allowed students to become members political parties, UUCA remains to be restrictive on the freedom of expression of students. For instance, Section 15(2) of UUCA 1971 prohibits students from becoming members of “any unlawful society, organization, body or group of persons, whether in or outside Malaysia” including those deemed by the Board “to be unsuitable to the interest and wellbeing of the students or the University.” The same provision also prohibits students from becoming involved in activities of political parties within the campus.
*
Another example is Section 16 which empowers Vice-Chancellors to suspend or dissolve any student body or societies which are “detrimental or prejudicial to the interests or well-being of the University, or to the interests or well-being of any of the students or employee of the University, or to public order, safety or security”.
*
On the surface, such provisions seem reasonable but the wording is vague, thus problematic. What is deemed to be ‘unsuitable to the interest and wellbeing of students or the University’ or ‘detrimental or prejudicial to the interests or well-being of the University’ lies at the discretion of the university board to interpret it as they wish. When such power is exercised arbitrarily, ambiguous provisions coupled with wide, discretionary powers vested in the university administration give room for abuse laws and silencing of dissent to take place. It then becomes impossible for those who do not wield such power to participate in politics in any meaningful way.
*
Asheeq’s case is an example of the dangerous effect of such provisions. Asheeq, who participated in a political protest which was held outside of UKM campus and had no relevance to UKM, was guilty of breaking university regulations. Asheeq’s is not the sole example of such abuse – many others such as Anis Shafiqah, Fahmi Zainol, Muhammad Hilman and many others have been severely punished for expressing their views. Anis Shafiqah, who was also involved in the organisation of the TangkapMO1 protest, received a six-month suspension and RM400 fine from University of Malaya (UM).
*
In November 2014, University of Malaya Student Union (UMSU) secretary-general Fahmi Zainol was suspended by the university for two semesters as punishment for his role in arranging a speech by opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. The other committee members of UMSU were also penalised for their involvement. Safwan Shamsuddin was suspended for one semester and fined RM300, Adam Fistival Wilfrid and Haw Yu Hong were fined RM150 each, and Khairol Najib Hashim was issued a reprimand. UM’s decision against the students were later quashed by the Federal Court, on grounds that the university board had not carried out disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the university’s rules.
*
In 2012 , Muhammad Hilman and three other students faced disciplinary action from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) for being present at the Hulu Selangor by-election. Section 15(5)(a) of UUCA (now repealed) prohibits any student from ‘showing sympathy or support towards a political party’ at that time. UKM’s action was later quashed by the Court of Appeal on grounds that the provision was unconstitutional as it unreasonably restricted the students’ Article 10 right to freedom of speech.
*
We acknowledge that there are limitations to one’s right to freedom of speech set out by Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. However, we assert that Asheeq’s case does not constitute a valid limitation despite the political nature of the protest. As per Justice Hishammudin Mohd Yunus JCA in paragraph 16 of Muhammad Hilman Idham & Ors v. Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors, “A student who expressed support for or opposition against a political party could not be seen to harm or bring about an adverse effect on public order or public morality. Political parties were legal entities carrying out legitimate political activities. Political leaders including Ministers and members of the federal and state legislatures were members of political parties.”
*
Asheeq is exercising the very skill universities are here to teach students: the ability to think critically. Arguably, in order to become the global leaders of tomorrow, poised to take Malaysia to greater heights, students need to be able to think critically and act responsibly. A university is a vital space to encourage such activity. As such, universities need to provide a space for students to do so, and guide them where they go wrong, not silence and punish them. Arbitrary laws that are interpreted restrictively must be done away so that students are empowered to express themselves, not merely in their academics but also on matters that concern the nation.
*
With that, we call on Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) to lift the suspension on Asheeq Ali immediately. We also reiterate the call to reform the University and University Colleges Act 1971 to protect and uphold students’ right to freedom of expression.
In solidarity with Asheeq Ali and our fellow students back home,

Hong Jinghann
President KPUM 2017/18

Michelle Liu Jo Yee
Human Rights & Activism Officer KPUM 2017/18
& Kesatuan Penuntut Undang-undang di United Kingdom dan Eire (KPUM)

Leave a Reply