11 August 2010- The cabinet has decided against allowing university students to participate in party politics.
Higher Education Minister Mohamed Khaled Nordin (right) announced this today, the Star reported this afternoon.
This follows the statement by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin yesterday that the government would not change its stand against allowing student involvement in politics.
Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad had also voiced his disagreement with the proposal to amend the Universities and University Colleges Act to this effect.
Khaled said the decision, however, did not prevent students from learning about and following political developments.
"Section 15 of the Universities and University Colleges Act (AUKU) 1971 is already adequate as students are allowed to be involved in political parties if they obtain permission from their vice-chancellors," the Star reported him as saying.
In the latest development, federal government owned Bernama issued a note to editors at 6.30pm stating that Higher Education Ministry has requested the press not to publish any news on this.
Reacting to the government announcement, Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin expressed strong disagreement on Twitter.
"(The) cabinet decision not allowing university students to be involved in political parties is gutless and indicates outdated thinking. There," quipped Khairy, who is also BN Youth head.
Among those who had expressed support for allowing student involvement in politics were Deputy Education Minister Saifuddin Abdullah.
"What is the difference between teachers who have been allowed to participate in politics and university students and lecturers?
"PKR Youth believes and is convinced the reason (for the decision) is the concern that if the same rights were given to students, issues (that are of concern to) the people would be raised and drown Umno-BN," said the opposition leader in a statement.
Shamsul Iskandar also challenged the government to prohibit the activities of various Umno-linked groups that operate in local and foreign universities, such Kelab Umno, Kelab Aspirasi and Puteri Umno.
"The reality is that the students are the agents of change for the masses," said the lawyer.
20 comments:
pada pendapat saya, pelajar ni biar dia tumpukan kpb pelajaran dulu.
sedangkan suruh belajar pun dia masuk politik. tak payah diajar.
takut pula jika tidak dilarang masuk politik maka parti2 politik akan berkempen di kampus, yg tercicir pelajar umat m juga. sebab bangsa lain lebih bijak fokuskan kpd pelajaran kot.
parti politik tak akan kisah jika pelajar tercicir dan ibubapa di kampung hampa anak tak dapat degree, asalkan mereka dapat pekerja baru yg kerja kuat dgn free.
yg diperlukan negara kini ialah pelajar cemerlang agar menjadi engineer dan akauntan cemerlang yg dapat naikkan nama negara.
sedangkan orang politik ni macam sampah - kat mana2 dah ada, dah banyak.
tapi nak cari pekerja profesional yg bijak dan pandai, naikkan martabat bangsa, agama dan negara, agak payah.
Dalam hal ini aku sokong kata-kata Khairy Jamaludin dalam petikan diatas 100%.
Salam semua,
setuju dgn komen dari remgold.
belajar sampai grad & dapatkan kerja yg elok dulu, dah stable karang lantak la anda nak berpolitik ke beretorik ke berhipokrit ke apa bala ke, sbb masa tu nanti anda dh boleh tanggung segala2nya sendiri. kalau masuk U pun dgn duit PTPTN (tu pun belum tentu nak bayar balik), tak payahlah nak bergiat dlm parti politik sedangkan anda masih belajar.
just because Mahathir cakap beliau tak suka mahasiswa berpolitik itu bukan bermakna beliau tak mahu mahasiswa ambil tahu dan ambil berat perkembangan semasa. ikutilah perkembangan semasa atas dasar "nice to know" dan fikirkan bagaimana kelak anda dapat menyumbang ke arah tahap yg lebih baik apabila memasuki alam pekerjaan dlm lautan masyarakat umum nanti. bukannya dgn menunjuk hero sebelum tiba masanya.
“Mereka (mahasiswa) sepatutnya menggunakan kesempatan yang ada itu untuk menuntut ilmu, sebaliknya jika terbabit dalam politik, itu boleh dianggap perbuatan tidak bertanggungjawab. “Malah, mereka akan mempunyai banyak masa untuk terbabit dalam politik sebaik menamatkan pengajian. Apabila mereka sudah bekerja dan mempunyai pendapatan sendiri, itulah masa yang sesuai.” - this was what Mahathir exactly said when asked about the initial proposal to allow university students actively involved in political parties.
sekadar berkongsi pendapat. I was a "mahasiswa", too.
tambah sikit:
Saifuddin Abdullah, Khairy Jamaluddin dan Shamsul Iskandar hanya pentingkan populariti jangka pendek. Manakala Muhyiddin Yassin, Khaled Nordin dan Dr. Mahathir dalam perkara ini mengutamakan survival dan masa depan anak bangsa mengatasi populariti murahan tersebut.
Kenapa pelajar tidak diberi peluang memilih sendiri sama ada mereka ingin melibatkan diri atau tidak? Di Malaysia, pada usia 18 tahun, individu sudah boleh memperakui kontrak. Kalau diiktiraf undang2 untuk sain kontrak (termasuk pinjaman, kontrak kerja, dll), kenapa tidak diiktiraf undang2 untuk membuat keputusan sendiri dari segi politik?
Simply put, we trust you to sign a multimillion ringgit contract/agreement or be a company director or get married, but somehow we feel you are not mature enough to get involved in political activities. Go figure!
@Hazrul D Nizam
Simply put, just because it's legal, that doesn't mean it's always a right thing to do, especially when you already got higher commitments such as furthering your studies in polytechnics, universities etc., let alone doing so with taxpayers' money.
I have many friends studying abroad in Indonesia, Egypt, Jordan, Ireland, etc.
At all their places of study, there is always 'Kelab UMNO Luar Negara' (names varies).
Somehow mahasiswa studying abroad can join political parties yet local mahasiswa are banned?
Can I join Kelab UMNO too? (I am currently studying at UiTM)
kalau nak pelajar universiti berfikiran seperti orang dewasa, dan bukan seperti anak-anak yang hanya nak disuap jawapan setiap masa, maka perlulah beri mereka peluang untuk membuat keputusan sendiri.
nak berpolitik, nak berjudi, nak berfoya-foya, nak naik motorsikal bersama teman lelaki, nak tumpukan pelajaran...sudah dewasa kan, buatlah keputusan sendiri.
@Average Joe,
Really? Then since the taxpayers' money is used to subsidise petrol, how about controlling the type of car we drive. Just make sure everyone drives the same car. Easier, right?
Since the students are good enough to enter colleges, why can't they decide for themselves if it is the right thing to do? BTW, Tunku, Tun Razak, Dr. M and Anwar were active in politics during their studies. It didn't stop them from being leaders, did it?
As far as I am concerned, students have brains, they can think for themselves. Let THEM decide.
@ Hazrul D Nizam
Quote: "Then since the taxpayers' money is used to subsidise petrol, how about controlling the type of car we drive. Just make sure everyone drives the same car. Easier, right? "
There was a very good proposal to impose a structured subsidy rationalisation where fuel subsidies would be retained for of lower household income and small-to-medium enterprises while those of high household income and big businesses shall bear the full cost, as explained here:
http://darahtuah.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/poor-biased-vs-rich-biased/
http://darahtuah.wordpress.com/2009/10/29/penstrukturan-semula-skim-subsidi-petrol-%E2%80%93-baik-untuk-rakyat/
But for the reasons you might already know, the proposal was haphazardly scrapped:
http://darahtuah.wordpress.com/2010/03/10/kerajaan-prihatin-atau-lemah/
...and the rest was history. By the way, were are talking about the restriction on students' direct involvement in political parties. My explaination above is just to reply to your particular question related to fuel subsidy, and it doesn't mean you're using a correct analogy.
Quote: "BTW, Tunku, Tun Razak, Dr. M and Anwar were active in politics during their studies. It didn't stop them from being leaders, did it?"
While they were active in various societies and largely socioeconomic-oriented NGOs, they were NOT actively participating in any full-fledge Political PARTY itself until they completed their studies. Even for some politically-leaning societies in which Tunku, Tun Razak and Dr. Mahathir (but not Anwar) were actively involved in, that was reasonable due to the fact that the country was under systematically-repressive colonial rule during that time. It's not the same for today, when we already have many other avenues to channel whatever our grievances.
The government itself does never intent to stop students from keeping abreast with socio-political developments around them. If really you want to contribute, there are various other avenues to do so, start with any of numerous societies and clubs registered in your university (have you ever tried?). Instead of directly jumping into political parties when your graduation (and your first job) still miles away.
And recently the popularity-crazy Deputy Minister of Higher Education wanted students to be allowed for active and direct participation in political PARTIES during their terms in university.
Still, you couldn't even digest the difference between the deputy minister's desire and the ministry's policy regarding this particular matter? If you're a student, better complete your studies first, then.
@ Hidup Sihat
Daripada apa yg saya tahu, penubuhan Kelab UMNO di luar negara adalah lebih sebagai reaksi UMNO setelah PAS terlebih dahulu menubuhkan Kelab Hizbi. Correct me if I am wrong. A good idea anyway, I believe we may discuss the possibility of having political party-linked Clubs in our local universities instead of allowing direct participation of undergraduates in political parties themselves. This might even be a better alternative for the university administrations themselves to systematically manage the students' party-linked activities - instead of a blanket ban, or a laissez-faire inaction.
@ Hazrul D Nizam
Quote: "Then since the taxpayers' money is used to subsidise petrol, how about controlling the type of car we drive. Just make sure everyone drives the same car. Easier, right? "
There was a very good proposal to impose a structured subsidy rationalisation where fuel subsidies would be retained for of lower household income and small-to-medium enterprises while those of high household income and big businesses shall bear the full cost, as explained here:
http://darahtuah.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/poor-biased-vs-rich-biased/
http://darahtuah.wordpress.com/2009/10/29/penstrukturan-semula-skim-subsidi-petrol-%E2%80%93-baik-untuk-rakyat/
But for the reasons you might already know, the proposal was haphazardly scrapped:
http://darahtuah.wordpress.com/2010/03/10/kerajaan-prihatin-atau-lemah/
...and the rest was history. By the way, were are talking about the restriction on students' direct involvement in political parties. My explaination above is just to reply to your particular question related to fuel subsidy, and it doesn't mean you're using a correct analogy.
Quote: "BTW, Tunku, Tun Razak, Dr. M and Anwar were active in politics during their studies. It didn't stop them from being leaders, did it?"
While they were active in various societies and largely socioeconomic-oriented NGOs, they were NOT actively participating in any full-fledge Political PARTY itself until they completed their studies. Even for some politically-leaning societies in which Tunku, Tun Razak and Dr. Mahathir (but not Anwar) were actively involved in, that was reasonable due to the fact that the country was under systematically-repressive colonial rule during that time. It's not the same for today, when we already have many other avenues to channel whatever our grievances.
The government itself does never intent to stop students from keeping abreast with socio-political developments around them. If really you want to contribute, there are various other avenues to do so, start with any of numerous societies and clubs registered in your university (have you ever tried?). Instead of directly jumping into political parties when your graduation (and your first job) still miles away.
And recently the popularity-crazy Deputy Minister of Higher Education wanted students to be allowed for active and direct participation in political PARTIES during their terms in university.
Still, you couldn't even digest the difference between the deputy minister's desire and the ministry's policy regarding this particular matter? If you're a student, better complete your studies first, then.
@ Hidup Sihat
Daripada apa yg saya tahu, penubuhan Kelab UMNO di luar negara adalah lebih sebagai reaksi UMNO setelah PAS terlebih dahulu menubuhkan Kelab Hizbi. Correct me if I am wrong. A good idea anyway, I believe we may discuss the possibility of having political party-linked Clubs in our local universities instead of allowing direct participation of undergraduates in political parties themselves. This might even be a better alternative for the university administrations themselves to systematically manage the students' party-linked activities - instead of a blanket ban, or a laissez-faire inaction.
@ frizzorama (& Hazrul too)
Quote: "nak berpolitik, nak berjudi, nak berfoya-foya, nak naik motorsikal bersama teman lelaki, nak tumpukan pelajaran...sudah dewasa kan, buatlah keputusan sendiri."
"students have brains, they can think for themselves. Let THEM decide."
Sorry to say, having a brain is one story, but the ability to think thoroughly and wisely (or lack of thereof) is a different story altogether. Memanglah after all terpulang pada diri masing-masing buat keputusan sendiri, tetapi kalau kesan daripada keputusan yg salah mengakibatkan terjadinya perkara2 yg tak elok and then pulak mak bapak yg masih nak kena tanggung semua tu (tu pun belum kira taxpayers' money yg dah disia-siakan), is it fair? Lu pikir la sendiri...
@ Tuan Rumah
Maaf ada masalah teknikal masa nak postkan comment tadi, jadi tersubmit komen yg sama 2 kali. Silakan padam salah satu. Terima kasih kerana sudi berkongsi ruang pendapat dgn kami di sini...
Assalamualaikum.
BB, saya rasa kita perlu bezakan antara ruang dan tanggungjawab. Saya setuju dengan rakan-rakan pembaca yang begitu sayang dengan mahasiswa dan tidak mahu mereka gagal dalam pelajaran.
Saya faham itu.
Cuma, kita perlu faham, yang menjadi isu pada hari ini ialah RUANG. Apakah kerana hanya MUNGKIN pelajar akan gagal jika kuat berpolitik - maka TIDAK PERLU ADA RUANG untuk mereka menyertai politik kepartian?
Jika sifir ini diterima pakai, maka sudah pastilah saya boleh bertanyakan satu soalan - bagaimana pula jika pelajar MUNGKIN tidak gagal walapun kuat politik?
Soalan lain ialah - bagaimana pula jika pelajar MUNGKIN gagal pelajaran kerana terlalu kuat bersukan, menyanyi, bermain gamelan, dan sebagainya? Adakah aktiviti-aktiviti ini juga perlu diharamkan daripada para pelajar menyertai?
Sebab itu analisis logik sebegini tidak tepat.
Soal tanggungjawab, memang jelas pelajar perlu belajar. Itu jelas. Cuma mengapa ruang politik kepartian itu ditiadakan? Kerana ada ruang lain? Kerana pelajar masih anak-anak? Kerana pelajar makan duit rakyat?
Ini bukan soal pertukaran tanggungjawab - tetapi penyertaan golongan muda dalam politik arus perdana. Kerajaan tidak boleh terus tega dengan keputusan yang akan membuktikan keabsahan tuduhan pemerhati politik bahawa kerajaan takut pelajar akan sokong pembangkang.
Lebih ketat kerajaan mengawal, lebih sukar tuduhan sebegini ingin ditepis.
Average Joe,
I am prepared to explain why my analogy is relevant but let's stick to the subject.
1st, you need to check your history. Tunku & Tun Razak were BOTH members of UK Labour Party.
2nd, like what KJ said in his response, the thinking that gomen must control everything is outdated. If you think the future belongs to the youth, you must trust them to decide what the future would look like.
3rd, Tak payahla kita nak berselindung kononnya kalau gagal nanti mak bapak rugi, taxpayers' money wasted bla bla bla. Students drop out for a thousand of reasons. Some spend too much time playing snooker instead of studying. Do we ban snooker too? Some cant cope with whatever subjects they are taking (maybe because they are not qualified in the first place but hey, NEP rocks bla bla bla). Some students fail because they are forced by parents to study subjects that they don't like. Some are distracted by percintaan di kampus. Most failure have nothing to do with politics. How do we deal with these issues then? Ban students from having relationships? Send those who fail to jail for wasting taxpayers' money? Let's face it. Under the best circumstances, there will be failure, for whatever reasons. Harvard ke, Oxbridge ke, MIT ke, mesti ada yg kantoi, let alone local U. Prohibiting them from getting invoved in politics WON'T stop this.
4th, Why are we so afraid of letting students decide what THEY want? Because they might fail? So apparently CEOs of GLCs may fail and throw billions of people's money down the drain but students cant be allowed to make mistakes because, err, uhm, we want them to be robots who cant make decisions?
5th, persoalannya bukan samada sudah ada banyak ruang untuk menyuarakan pendapat. The question is the students' right to associate themselves with anybody that they like. Cuba baca Perlembagaan - Citizens have freedom of association. That's why you cant take action against politicians who jump from one party to another. Soalnya why students are being discriminated against? Kalau saya berminat nak join Parti Cap Ayam, kenapa gomen sibuk2 nak halang saya? Kalau mak bapak saya yg rugi, itu urusan peribadi keluarga saya, bukan urusan orang lain. If we want to talk about wasting taxpayers' money, I can easily list down 100 cases where government has wasted billions of people's money. Tak payah nak blame students.
Average Joe,
I am prepared to explain why my analogy is relevant but let's stick to the subject.
1st, you need to check your history. Tunku & Tun Razak were BOTH members of UK Labour Party.
2nd, like what KJ said in his response, the thinking that gomen must control everything is outdated. If you think the
future belongs to the youth, you must trust them to decide what the future would look like.
3rd, Tak payahla kita nak berselindung kononnya kalau gagal nanti mak bapak rugi, taxpayers' money wasted bla
bla bla. Students drop out for a thousand of reasons. Some spend too much time playing snooker instead of studying.
Do we ban snooker too? Some cant cope with whatever
subjects they are taking (maybe because they are not
qualified in the first place but hey, NEP rocks bla bla bla).
Some students fail because they are forced by parents to
study subjects that they don't like. Some are distracted by
percintaan di kampus. Most failure have nothing to do with
politics. How do we deal with these issues then? Ban
students from having relationships? Send those who fail to
jail for wasting taxpayers' money? Let's face it. Under the
best circumstances, there will be failure, for whatever
reasons. Harvard ke, Oxbridge ke, MIT ke, mesti ada yg
kantoi, let alone local U. Prohibiting them from getting
invoved in politics WON'T stop this.
4th, Why are we so afraid of letting students decide what THEY want? Because they might fail? So apparently CEOs of GLCs may fail and throw billions of people's money down the drain but students cant be allowed to make mistakes because, err, uhm, we want them to be robots who cant make decisions?
5th, persoalannya bukan samada sudah ada banyak ruang untuk menyuarakan pendapat. The question is the students' right to associate themselves with anybody that they like. Cuba baca Perlembagaan - Citizens have freedom of association. That's why you cant take action against politicians who jump from one party to another. Soalnya why students are being discriminated against? Kalau saya berminat nak join Parti Cap Ayam, kenapa gomen sibuk2 nak halang saya? Kalau mak bapak saya yg rugi, itu urusan peribadi keluarga saya, bukan urusan orang lain. If we want to talk about wasting taxpayers' money, I can easily list down 100 cases where government has wasted billions of people's money. Tak payah nak blame students.
1st - Like what I've said before, that was during the time our country still under colonial rule, hence it was fairly reasonable that Tunku, Tun Razak and Mahathir entered party-based politics during their undergraduate days - since it was the only viable way to instill awareness amongst the populace (both Malayans and Britons alike) and mobilise them to oppose British colonial rule not only in Malaya but also around the globe. As for the case of today, which colonial rule are we fighting against? Can you guarantee that Malaysian political parties are as professional and as truthful as their British/European counterparts when it comes into caderizing the youths?!
2nd - "If you think the future belongs to the youth, you must trust them to decide what the future would look like." I agree with those words, BUT I just don't think allowing direct (let alone unmonitored) undergraduate participation in political parties will help towards achieving that vision - neither it's the only nor it's the best way. Many students even look down at various leadership-building activities and programmes offered in their own universities yet aim ambitiously high to involve in political parties. If this bunch of students even avoid these very good starting fundamental steps towards leadership, then, how on earth could they dream for leading the bigger society outside, let alone leading the nation and deciding its future? Dream on.
3rd - Students drop out for various reasons, but none of them is as deleterious as unmonitored direct involvement in partisan politics. For the "other reasons" you cited, those students have perhaps strayed to failure right from day one, but the same could not be said about those directly involved in political party activities. Many started off as bright students and are believed to be able to balance their political works to their academic commitment, but later their academic performance eventually drop as they move deeper into political party works. What more, once they've possibly been brainwashed and indoctrinated into extreme fanaticism by the political party they joined. (This is relevant to the last question I've thrown in point no. 1.) There have been already many such macabre cases, but for an example you should do a research on the case of Wan Norhayati Wan Alias who had failed her engineering course at UTM after being intensively occupied with political party works and got herself indoctrinated for several semesters. Luckily, UiTM gave her a second chance. Be reminded that this Wan Norhayati is just the tip of an iceberg, and living in an ever-changing world we can't afford to have another dozen of Wan Norhayati-like cases.
4th - APART from barring university students from direct involvement in political parties, I don't see in any other way that the authorities are afraid to let the students "decide what they want" as claimed. There are various useful activities under different societies/clubs/groups in universities for students to start with, in which the authorities would never prohibit you from being involved. But the students' response...? Pathetic! Program-program berfaedah di universiti sendiri pun ramai student tak minat, tapi bila tak dibenarkan terlibat dalam parti politik luar, bising pulak kata universiti/kerajaan menghalang kehendak anda? Nak cerita pasal GLC CEOs pulak? Nak off-topic lagi lah tu...
5th - If you think the AUKU is so unscontitutional, why until now none of AUKU's opposers bring this matter to the court? I challenge you to do so. One more thing to ponder, when many students who involved in political parties become brainwashed/indoctrinated into extreme fanaticism to the point that they completely neglect their studies and failed, is there any solution/remedy prescribed by the so-called clause of Constitution you cited? It sometimes makes me laugh seeing people citing clauses of the Constitution whenever they feel it suits their purpose but keeping mum and disregarding it when they feel it doesn't. You may want to list down 100 cases of taxpayers' money waste, but beware, numerous cases of student failures due to over-preoccupation in political works and fanaticism could suit one of them.
"Kalau saya berminat nak join Parti Cap Ayam, kenapa gomen sibuk2 nak halang saya? Kalau mak bapak saya yg rugi, itu urusan peribadi keluarga saya, bukan urusan orang lain."
Even kalau kamu tersasar dan gagal (eg. disebabkan keterlaluan berpolitik), kamu masih anggap itu urusan peribadi kamu dan keluarga kamu dan orang lain tak perlu sibuk-sibuk?! Kalau kamu masuk universiti dengan 100% dibiayai oleh mak bapak kamu sendiri, itu lain cerita. Tapi kalau kamu menyebabkan ribuan wang biasiswa/study loan disia-siakan, jangan nak perasan kata itu urusan peribadi. IPTA students, please bear in your mind that the fee you pay every semester from 1st semester until the final semester is just a small fraction of the actual total cost. Bulk of the rest is continuously subsidised by the government you curse. Oh bila orang lain allegedly bazirkan taxpayers' money boleh pulak bising, tapi kalau sendiri gagal, dah bazirkan biasiswa/study loan, itu urusan peribadi pulak yeah?! Kalau sorang je gagal, the amount of money is still negligible tapi kalau dah beratus atau beribu student failed, that amount dah sama dgn 2-3 projek mega. Kalau ya pun peribadi, reading that very statement alone somehow shows what a selfish and individualistic personality you are. I just don't think this kind of half-baked personalities should be allowed into our political parties at a very young age, let alone when they have a bigger responsibility to complete their studies and to prove their worth by building a good career first. Otherwise, they would only screw up the parties, screwing up the whole nation as an effect.
I really don't know if PAS has make 'Kelab Hizbi' or anything else. If it is definitely true, then overseas mahasiswa still allowed to join it too, am I right?
My confused mind currently pondering somehow mahasiswa studying abroad can join political parties yet local mahasiswa are banned?
Post a Comment