Whither academic freedom in Malaysia?

 

From P Ramasamy

I find it perplexing that Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia’s acting registrar felt the need to issue a circular cautioning academic staff against making statements critical of the government or its agencies.

In a subsequent clarification, UKM stated that it welcomes critical comments, provided they are aimed at improving government performance. However, the meaning of this follow-up statement remains unclear.

The initial circular from UKM’s acting registrar essentially endorsed the directive from the chief secretary to the government, which prohibits staff from making verbal or written statements contrary to the government’s aims and objectives.

UKM was the first public university to endorse this directive, though it now seems to have softened its stance.

Whether UKM continues to support the chief secretary’s directive or has backtracked, the reality remains: universities in Malaysia are not expected to stifle the dissemination of critical ideas.

Unlike government agencies, universities operate under different principles. The rules and regulations governing civil servants are far more stringent than those in academia. Even though public universities are taxpayer-funded, it is unnecessary to impose directives that demand compliance from academics in this manner.

The role of academics in Malaysia is already heavily restricted by laws and regulations. Compared to their counterparts in Europe and the US, Malaysian academics enjoy far less freedom. Rather than imposing further controls, the government should focus on liberalising academia.

Critical and challenging publications are essential for stimulating knowledge and expertise. Academics should not be expected to align their work with government policies; in fact, they are supposed to critically engage with those policies, particularly when they do not serve the public interest.

It is particularly surprising that this directive, which discourages critical publications, came from the chief secretary of the so-called Madani government. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s philosophy emphasises the pursuit of knowledge through critical and creative thinking. Yet, these virtues seem to have been lost amid the directives and circulars issued by bureaucrats in both the civil service and public universities.

Could it be that these directives are issued with Anwar’s full knowledge? Are we to believe that the Madani government’s stated virtues are mere pretensions?

The government’s apparent desire to regulate the production of knowledge and restrict critical publications suggests that it aims to keep academic discourse at a mediocre level, confined to works that uncritically endorse the ruling administration.

If the government seeks to control the output of universities, especially in terms of critical research, it signals a deeper issue. Academia should not be seen as a tool for serving those in power but as an institution that challenges and informs the nation’s direction through the dissemination of critical ideas.

While Malaysia has many public and private universities aimed at producing scientific talent for industrial growth, their role should extend beyond talent development. Universities must contribute to the country’s vision by fostering critical discourse.

A government that imposes control over universities is a government on the verge of moral bankruptcy.

Even if the Malaysian academic landscape is largely conservative, there are scholars who long for intellectual space and freedom. It is essential that overzealous politicians and bureaucrats do not squeeze out what little critical space remains in academia. - FMT

P Ramasamy is a former Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia professor and a former assemblyman and Penang deputy chief minister.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.