The Star
Reports by SHAILA KOSHY, MARTIN CARVALHO, NG CHENG YEE, YUEN MEIKENG, WONG PEK MEI, P. ARUNA, KANG SOO CHEN and YVONNE LIM
Reports by SHAILA KOSHY, MARTIN CARVALHO, NG CHENG YEE, YUEN MEIKENG, WONG PEK MEI, P. ARUNA, KANG SOO CHEN and YVONNE LIM
PUTRAJAYA:
Section 15(5)(a) of the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971
(UUCA) which restricts students from expressing support or opposing any
political party has been ruled unconstitutional.
In
a landmark 2-1 majority decision, the Court of Appeal held that the
provision was unreasonable and violated the constitutional guarantee of
freedom of speech.
The
court said this yesterday in overturning a High Court decision on Sept
28 last year that Section 15(5)(a) fell within the public order and
morality restrictions on freedom of speech as spelled out under Article
10(2)(a) of the Federal Constitution.
While Justices Hishamuddin Yunus and Linton Albert allowed the appeal, Justice Low Hop Bing, who chaired the panel, dissented.
Justice
Low said the restriction was necessary to “prevent infiltration of
political ideologies” among students who were “easily influenced” as it
could affect the primary purpose of universities, that is, the pursuit
of education.
The
appeal was brought by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) then
political science undergraduates Muhammad Hilman Idham, Woon King
Chai, Muhammad Ismail Aminuddin and Azlin Shafina Mohamad Adza who had
faced disciplinary action for being present during the by-election
campaign in Hulu Selangor parliamentary on April 24 last year.
Justice
Hishamuddin said he failed to see how a student who expressed support
for or against a political party could bring about an adverse effect on
public order or morality.
Citing
the activities a student could do at 21 – enter into contracts, marry,
vote – he said it was irrational and an irony that the UUCA barred them
from saying anything that could be construed as supporting or opposing a
political party.
He
said Section 15(5)(a) was “not only counter-productive but repressive
in nature” as it impeded healthy development of the critical mind.
“Universities
should be the breeding ground of reformers and thinkers, and not
institutions to produce students trained as robots.”
Justice
Linton held it was an “utter absurdity” that university or college
students faced “the grim prospect of expulsion” because of their
presence at a by-election.
Justice
Low said the restrictions were to protect both the students and the
institution’s interest as a matter of policy and therefore were
reasonable.
He continued that those finding fault with the UUCA “have their remedy at the ballot box”.
No comments:
Post a Comment