No room for debate: The quiet crisis of academic freedom on campus — Khoo Ying Hooi

JUNE 17 — The recent decision by Universiti Malaya (UM), Malaysia's oldest university, to cancel a student-organised documentary screening and forum on assembly rights illustrates a worrying narrowing of academic space.
When the student collectives Mandiri and Liga Mahasiswa tried to examine the practical and civic significance of the Peaceful Assembly Act, administrators abruptly pulled the plug, citing vague concerns about 'security and public order.'
Student organisers framed the move not merely as an isolated act of censorship but as symptomatic of a deeper institutional reluctance to accommodate critical engagement.
Their response was uncompromising.
Describing the cancellation as 'a blatant violation of academic freedom and freedom of expression,' the students demanded assurances that neither participants nor speakers would face disciplinary repercussions and urged the university to reaffirm its commitment to open dialogue.
The incident quickly drew national attention. PKR Youth called on the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) to investigate, pointing out that students should not be denied the opportunity to debate public issues in a civil, accountable setting.
Unfortunately, the episode is not unique.
Just two months earlier, a campus-based forum exploring Malaysia's constitutional identity – whether the state is fundamentally secular or religious –– was similarly aborted on the grounds that it touched on the sensitive '3R' trifecta of race, religion, and royalty.
Despite official warnings, the organisers moved the discussion off-campus, vowing 'no surrender' in their effort to protect student and academic autonomy.
If universities cannot host difficult conversations, what is left of their purpose?
The writer says a university should be more than a credentialing factory or neutral research hub. — File picture by Ahmad Zamzahuri
Public universities elsewhere have faced comparable pressures. In 2022, auxiliary police at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) halted activist Fahmi Reza's 'Kelas Demokrasi' within minutes, forcing students to regroup in a nearby café.
Malaysia's legal scaffolding amplifies these tendencies. The Sedition Act, Peaceful Assembly Act, and Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) still enshrine restrictive norms governing speech, protest, and 'political' activity on campus.
The Peaceful Assembly Act, heralded as a liberalising step when introduced, continues to criminalise unnotified gatherings and impose age restrictions, limiting its value as a conduit for civic engagement.
A university should be more than a credentialing factory or neutral research hub.
It ought to be a crucible where students test ideas, challenge orthodoxies, and learn the habits of democratic citizenship.
When spaces for honest debate on assembly rights, secularism, racial politics, religious pluralism are systematically curtailed, a chilling effect sets in.
Students absorb an unspoken rule, when certain subjects are off-limits, and intellectual risk may carry personal cost.
Administrations typically defend cancellations by invoking 'harmony,' 'public order,' or 'security.'
Yet such rationales are rarely substantiated with concrete evidence of imminent danger.
The opacity of the process breeds mistrust, leaving organisers and audiences alike with no meaningful avenue to question or appeal the verdict.
Over time, this culture of precaution erodes not only student expression but also faculty autonomy.
Lecturers who might propose sensitive modules or invite provocative guest speakers increasingly self-censor, anticipating institutional push-back.
The resulting homogeneity undermines intellectual pluralism, precisely the quality that ought to distinguish a vibrant university.
Even political actors who are not natural allies of radical speech have begun to notice.
MCA Youth criticised the pattern of last-minute revocations, noting the incongruity of preaching freedom of expression while failing to safeguard academic inquiry.
PKR Youth's call for ministerial oversight likewise suggests that the defence of academic freedom now resonates across partisan lines, even if institutional practice continues to lag behind rhetorical commitments.
Academic freedom, of course, is not the freedom to speak without consequence; it presupposes norms of respect, reason, and scholarly integrity.
But it does oblige universities to act as guardians of discourse rather than gatekeepers of orthodoxy.
Malaysia's aspiration to remain a regional education hub suffers when its flagship institutions stifle dissent. Graduates who leave believing that fundamental civic questions such as peaceful assembly, constitutional identity, ethno-religious pluralism cannot be safely debated will be poorly equipped to lead a plural society.
Universities can still reverse course. Clear, consistent rules should spell out the narrow circumstances under which an event can be denied, provide a timely and transparent justification, and include an appeals mechanism.
If an event genuinely threatens public safety, the reasons must be articulated and open to scrutiny, not buried under generic anxieties.
Such clarity would strengthen institutional credibility and reassure students that universities remain spaces for rigorous, good-faith inquiry.
The forum cancellation, and the earlier 3R incident, are alarms not merely about student rights but about Malaysia's democratic health.
When the gate to critical discussion closes under the cloak of order, the casualty is free thought itself.
If students cannot question the architecture of civil liberties or constitutional safeguards, one must ask what kind of leadership the nation is preparing for the future.
Universities are the places where difficult questions meet informed debate and future leaders learn the discipline of disagreement.
To fulfil that mission, they must resist the temptation to silence.
Otherwise, conformity will replace curiosity, and deference will stand in for critical thinking.
That, ultimately, would threaten not only campus tranquillity but the democratic promise Malaysia still hopes to realise.
* Khoo Ying Hooi, PhD is an associate professor at Universiti Malaya.
** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Free Malaysia Today

8 hours ago

• Free Malaysia Today

Lower courts must follow apex court precedents, says CJ

Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat elaborated on the Federal Court's 40-page judgment which held that a fatwa could not be imposed on an organisation like Sisters in Islam as such entities cannot 'profess' a religion. PUTRAJAYA : Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat has reminded judges in the lower courts that they must adhere to legal precedents set by the Federal Court unless overruled by a subsequent decision from the same court. 'These precedents are binding, and failure to follow them is an affront to the administration of our justice system,' she said in a majority judgment delivered yesterday. The judgment held that a fatwa could not be imposed on an organisation like Sisters in Islam (SIS) as such entities cannot 'profess' a religion. Women's rights group SIS yesterday succeeded in its appeal to the Federal Court to quash a 2014 fatwa issued against it by the Selangor religious authorities. SIS had sought to quash a 2014 fatwa by the Selangor Islamic religious council (Mais) that it had deviated from the teachings of Islam by purportedly subscribing to 'liberalism' and 'religious pluralism'. In allowing SIS's appeal, Tengku Maimun said, the majority accepted the appellants' argument that the Court of Appeal had failed to apply the principle of stare decisis by wrongly attempting to distinguish the case from an earlier decision in SIS Forum (1) without any sound legal basis. Three years ago, a nine-member Federal Court bench led by Tengku Maimun unanimously ruled that it was unconstitutional for the Selangor legislative assembly to grant judicial review powers to the state's shariah high court. In that ruling, the bench also reaffirmed a 1998 apex court decision (Kesultanan Pahang v Sathask Realty Sdn Bhd) which held that corporations cannot profess a religion. 'Consistent with our guidance to the lower courts, we are fully inclined to uphold stare decisis and to follow the precedent established in SIS Forum (1) and Kesultanan Pahang,' she said in the 40-page judgment. Two years ago, the Court of Appeal dismissed SIS's challenge to the fatwa, which claimed that the women's group espoused liberalism and religious pluralism and had deviated from Islamic teachings. In a 2-1 decision, the appellate court concluded that the legal principle established in SIS Forum (1) was merely obiter dicta – a passing judicial remark not binding as precedent. However, Tengku Maimun refuted this, saying that the Federal Court's reasoning in SIS Forum (1) was not obiter dicta, but formed a core part of the court's legal reasoning. The court had held that Section 66A of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 was unconstitutional. She further noted that the earlier nine-member bench had ruled that shariah courts cannot conceptually exercise judicial review over artificial persons, such as corporate entities, even if they identify with Islam. Tengku Maimun, Court of Appeal president Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Justice Nallini Pathmanathan formed the majority in yesterday's ruling while Justice Abu Bakar Jais dissented. SIS, a company limited by guarantee and incorporated under the Companies Act 1965, argued that the fatwa was unconstitutional and could not be applied to a corporate entity governed by civil law.

Malay Mail

8 hours ago

• Malay Mail

As police look on, student demonstraters take to KK streets to call for reform (VIDEO)

KOTA KINABALU, June 21 — The steady beating of drums and rousing chants calling for clean governance could be heard throughout Kota Kinabalu's central business district streets today, as a student-led anti-corruption demonstration walked the streets escorted by uniformed policemen. It's a rare sight for most as such protests, complete with megaphones, banners, placards and signs, are usually not allowed by authorities and limited to restricted areas. A group of some 100 or so people consisting mostly of students from University Malaysia Sabah and civic society gathered in front of the Suria Sabah shopping mall for the second edition of its Gempur Rasuah Sabah rally. Unlike the first time they had their rally where they marched from UMS to the state administrative building along a busy highway before they were stopped, the police presence this time was much more congenial, without the Light Strike Force unit or heavy arms — mostly helping keep public order on the busy roads. The police had approved their gathering on June 18 with the caveat they adhered to certain rules. Students and civil society groups accompanied by policemen took to the streets of Kota Kinabalu calling for clean and fair governance, transparency and a solution to their water shortage issue. — Picture by Julia Chan 'It's quite good to see this. It's a normal part of democracy and freedom of expression. It's good to see the police presence and actually helping them. No guns, no attacks, no abuse or disorderly conduct. 'I think it's good for the government to allow this to happen,' said Datuk Ahmad Abdul Rahman, Sabah's former State Assembly speaker who was passing by in the vicinity when he saw the commotion. Many motorists who passed by the group also honked their horns in solidarity with the group. Organised by student coalition Suara Mahasiswa, the Gempur Rasuah Sabah 2.0 rally participants carried signs denouncing corruption, calling for action against certain politicians and also demanding the authorities solve the water shortage issue which has been plaguing the university for months. The group left the mall entrance at around 2.30pm and walked towards the main market, when it started pouring. Stopping briefly to put on raincoats, they continued their march towards Centre Point shopping centre before ending up at Lintasan Deasoka near Gaya Street, where organisers have announced plans for a 24-hour sit-in. A passerby, former Sabah state assembly speaker Datuk Ahmad Abdul Rahman said such peaceful demonstrations was a sign of a healthy democracy. — Picture by Julia Chan A minor blip occurred when the group came across some people holding up a banner depicting an opposition political party. Some tension occurred between the two groups but was quickly dismissed with the help of police. Its leader Muhammad Fadhli Muhammad Kasim said that the students did not want to have any political connections. He also called for specific action from authorities, including investigations into alleged misconduct involving the Sabah Water Department (JANS) that had led to their water issue, a fully autonomous Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) office in the state, and investigation into the appointment of the state governor. Not one kilometre away, another smaller, less lively group calling themselves Gerakan Anak Muda dan Mahasiswa Anak Sabah (Gammas), held a demonstration lasting less than 30 minutes at Chong Tien Vun park. Claiming to be students of the university, their spokesperson Noridi @ Noraidi Maya insisted their gathering is not a counter-rally, but to express solidarity with Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor and 'defend the integrity of the government' after the many beneficial policies and provisions for students. Gammas's gathering did not obtain police approval but the gathering remained peaceful throughout. They dispersed shortly after reading out their mission statement to the media.

Malay Mail

9 hours ago

• Malay Mail

Rosmah calls Najib's DNAA in SRC case a ‘blessing from Allah'

KUALA LUMPUR, June 21 — Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor has expressed gratitude to supporters of her husband, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, following the High Court's decision to grant the ex-prime minister a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) yesterday. In a message posted on Facebook, she thanked those who shared open letters, videos, and social media posts about Najib's leadership. Rosmah said it was 'comforting' to see that her husband's legacy continues to be appreciated by many Malaysians. 'Yesterday's DNAA verdict for my husband was truly a blessing from Allah, made possible through your continuous prayers and well-wishes. 'We pray that this marks the beginning of better days ahead,' she said. Special mention was given to those who were physically present in court to support Najib and to those who expressed their joy online. Rosmah also disclosed that she was absent from court yesterday because she had spent the previous night caring for her granddaughter, who had a high fever. Rosmah ended her note with warm wishes for the weekend and a prayer for continued blessings on Najib's supporters. Yesterday, the High Court granted Najib a conditional discharge in his final SRC International case involving RM27 million, due to prolonged trial delays. Najib still has the main 1MDB trial pending.