AUKU MALAYSIA PDF

Maszlee Malik (tengah) bersama dengan wakil mahasiswa ketika perjumpaan berhubung pemansuhan AUKU di Putrajaya. PUTRAJAYA. Search. FMT News Free Malaysia Today. C. Kuala Lumpur. Wednesday, November 28, FMT News Tag: Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti ( AUKU). Specifically, the racial and religious politics of Malaysia is hardly an Though Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti (AUKU) bans party politics.

Author: Gura Kajigar
Country: Uganda
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Love
Published (Last): 16 June 2009
Pages: 401
PDF File Size: 6.47 Mb
ePub File Size: 11.58 Mb
ISBN: 503-4-34262-697-4
Downloads: 83102
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Vukree

Sepanjang enam bulan dalam tahun25 orang mahasiswa sudah dikenakan tindakan prosiding tatatertib oleh pihak Universiti masing-masing. Rata-rata mahasiswa yang dikenakan prosiding ini hanya mempraktikkan hak mereka sebagai rakyat Malaysia yang dijamin dalam Perlembagaan Persukutuan iaitu hak untuk berhimpun secara aman, hak untuk bersuara dan hak untuk beraktiviti dan berorganisasi.

Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti Auku, memberi kuasa kepada pihak Universiti untuk membuat Kaedah-kaedah tatatertib mahasiswa seperti yang dinyatakan dalam Seksyen 16 C Auku. Di dalam Auku sendiri tidak memiliki peruntukan mengenai kaedah tatatertib mahasiswa, tetapi Auku memberi kuasa kepada pihak Universiti untuk membuat regulasi tatatertib mengikut pertimbangan masing-masing. Namun kebanyakan IPTA menggunapakai kaedah tatatertib yang sama. Akta Institusi-institusi Pelajaran Tatatertib Akta pula merupakan satu akta yang memiliki peruntukan lengkap termasuk Kaedah-kaedah Tatatertib seperti yang diperuntukkan dalam Jadual Kedua Kaedah-kaedah Institusi Pelajaran Tatatertib Pelajar-PelajarAkta Jadual kedua ini mengandungi 26 sekyen yang memperuntukkan kesalahan tatatertib termasuk beberapa sekyen yang menghalang hak asasi mahasiswa seperti hak untuk berhimpun secara aman, hak untuk berekspresi dan hak untuk bebas berorganisasi.

Berikut merupakan senarai 25 mahasiswa yang telah dikenakan prosiding tatatertib oleh pihak universiti masing-masing sepanjang tahun Menyertai perhimpunan tanpa kebenaran pihak berkuasa dihadapan Parlimen pada 8 April Mengadakan perhimpunan dan perarakan dalam Universiti yang tidak mendapat kebenaran pihan Universiti. Disabitkan bersalah dan dihukum dengan diberi amaran. Berikut merupakan fakta kes mengenai prosiding tatatertib yang dikenakan terhadap 25 mahasiswa yang berkenaan.

Empat orang mahasiswa Universiti Malaya yang dikenakan surat tunjuk sebab kerana menyertai pehimpunan membantah penurunan harga getah di hadapan parlimen 8 April Pihak Universiti Malaya menggunakan peruntukan Kaedah 11 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti Tatatertib Pelajar-pelajarAkta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti iaitu tiada seorang pun pelajar, pertubuhan, badan atau kumpulan pelajar, boleh membuat, mengibar, atau memiliki apa-apa bendera, sepanduk, plakad, poster, lambang atau alat lain yang menimbulkan keadaan tidak berdisiplin, kekacauan, keingkaran atau pelanggaran Kaedah-kaedah ini.

Daripada 16 orang ini, 3 orang digantung pengajian satu semester, 8 orang dibuang dari Kolej Kediaman dan 5 orang masih dalam proses prosiding.

Pihak Universiti menggunakan Kaedah 9 3 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti iaitu tiada seorang pun pelajar boleh menghadiri atau menyertai sesuatu perhimpunan yang diadakan yang berlanggaran dengan Kaedah-kaedah universiti.

Beliau juga dituduh menyertai protes yang tidak mendapat kebenaran UITM.

Beliau disabitkan bersalah dan dikenakan hukuman amaran. Pihak universiti maalysia tiga peruntukan berikut untuk mensabitkan mahasiswa berkenaan:. Rata-rata universiti ini menggunakan Kaedah-kaedah amlaysia yang sama dan Kaedah-kaedah ini seperti diulang salin daripada Kaedah-kaedah Tatatertib yang terkandung dalam Akta Institusi Pelajaran Akta Tiada seorang pun pelajar, malayxia, badan atau kumpulan pelajar boleh, tanpa kebenaran Naib Canselor terlebih dahulu, mengadakan, menganjurkan atau memanggil, atau menyebabkan supaya diadakan, dianjurkan atau dipanggil atau dengan apa-apa cara, terlibat dalam mengadakan, menganjurkan atau memanggil, atau menyebabkan supaya diadakan, dianjurkan atau dipanggil atau, dengan apa-apa cara terlibat dalam melakukan apa-apa perbuatan untuk mengadakan, menganjurkan atau memanggil, apa-apa perhimpunan yang terdiri lebih daripada lima orang dalam mana-mana bahagian Kampus atau atas mana-mana tanah atau dalam mana-mana bangunan yang dipunyai oleh atau di bawah milikan atau kawalan Universiti atau yang digunakan bagi maksud Universiti.

Dalam memberikan kebenaran yang disebut dalam subkaedah 1Naib Canselor boleh mengenakan apa-apa sekatan, terma atau syarat sebagaimana yang difikirkannya perlu atau suai manfaat. Tiada seorang pun pelajar boleh menghadiri atau menyertai sesuatu perhimpunan yang diadakan yang berlanggaran dengan subkaedah 1 atau 2.

Kaedah 10 1 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti, Auku. Tiada seorang pun pelajar, pertubuhan, badan atau kumpulan pelajar boleh memiliki, atau menggunakan, atau mempunyai dalam milikan, jagaan atau kawalannya bagi maksud ucapan awam, apa-apa pembesar suara, pelaung suara, penguat suara atau alat seumpamanya yang lain tanpa kelulusan Naib Canselor terlebih dahulu. Kaedah 10 2 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti, Auku. Dalam memberikan kelulusan di bawah subkaedah 1Naib Canselor boleh mengenakan apa-apa sekatan, terma atau syarat sebagaimana yang difikirkannya perlu atau suai manfaat.

Kaedah 11 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti, Auku. Tiada seorang pun pelajar, pertubuhan, badan atau kumpulan pelajar, boleh—. Kaedah 12 1 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti, Auku.

Tiada seorang pun pelajar, pertubuhan, badan atau kumpulan pelajar, tanpa kebenaran Naib Canselor terlebih dahulu, aukj menerbitkan, malaysua atau mengedarkan apa-apa dokumen di dalam Kampus atau di luar Kampus. Kaedah 12 2 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti, Auku. Dalam memberikan kebenaran di bawah subkaedah 1Naib Canselor boleh mengenakan apa-apa sekatan, terma auk syarat sebagaimana yang difikirkannya perlu atau suai manfaat.

Kaedah 12 3 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti, Auku. Kebenaran yang dikehendaki di bawah kaedah ini hendaklah sebagai tambahan kepada apa-apa lesen, permit atau apa-apa bentuk pemberikuasaan yang lain yang dikehendaki di bawah mana-mana undang-undang bertulis lain.

Kaedah 15 Kaedah-kaedah Universiti, Auku. Aulu seorang pun pelajar, pertubuhan, badan atau kumpulan pelajar boleh,tanpa kelulusan Naib Canselor terlebih dahulu, membuat apa-apa representasi atau perhubungan lain, sama ada secara lisan atau bertulis ,alaysia dengan apa-apa cara lain, kepada mana-mana pegawai awam atau kepada akhbar atau kepada orang ramai semasa memberikan apa-apa kuliah, ucapan atau pernyataan awam atau semasa membuat apa-apa penyiaran melalui bunyi auky gambar, berhubung dengan apa-apa perkara berkaitan dengan Universiti aumu berkaitan dengan kakitangan atau pelajar Universiti, atas sifat mereka sebagai kakitangan atau pelajar Universiti atau berkaitan dengan dirinya atas sifatnya sebagai seorang pelajar Universiti.

  EXAMEN OIQ PDF

Tiada seorang pun pelajar, pertubuhan, badan atau kumpulan pelajar, boleh menganjurkan, menjalankan atau menyertai apa-apa kegiatan di luar Kampus yang mendatangkan kesan buruk secara langsung kepada Universiti atau yang memudaratkan kepentingan Universiti.

Naib Canselor boleh mengeluarkan garis panduan berkenaan dengan kegiatan yang memudaratkan kepentingan Universiti. As a politician holding public position as the prime minister, Najib Razak is answerable to the people and he is bound to subject to public criticism and scrutiny. He should have exercised his right to reply against the criticism from the readers of Malaysiakini, rather maalaysia slapping Malaysiakini with a legal suit.

By providing his side of story, the prime minister would be able to counter his critics and defend himself. This would also allow the public members to compare and judge for themselves who is speaking the truth. Suaram is convinced that Malaysiakini would publish the article of the prime minister, should he chose to exercise his right to reply, as this has been the long standing policy of Malaysiakini, in fact a fundamental policy auu any media outlet that claim themselves to be independent and commit to press freedom.

Besides that, the prime minister also has a lot of mainstream media, auou are under the absolute control of the government and the ruling parties, at his disposal to exercise his right to reply. By resorting to the defamation suit against Malaysiakini, it seems the prime minister is more interested to silence public criticism against him rather than engaging in public debates on to defend his policies and decisions.

The legal suit is going to have a chilling effect on press freedom as well as freedom of expression of the general public in debating issues of public interest. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, Frank La Rue also opined that public officials should refrain malaysiz using defamation law in the interest of monitoring public officials.

Suaram calls on the prime minister to drop auuku defamation suit against Malaysiakini immediately and refrain from using defamation law if his government is truly committed to promoting press freedom and freedom of expression. Suaram strongly condemns the secret forced deportation of two refugees and one asylum seekers from Sri Lanka yesterday by the government and putting all three of them at risk at the hand of Sri Lankan government.

The action of the Malaysian government is in violation of non-refoulement principle of the international customary law, which forbids the rendering of a true victim of persecution to their persecutor. The Malaysian government has the international obligation to observe international customary law even though Malaysia has not ratified the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. We are appalled that the family members of the three were not notified maalaysia the deportation neither was the UNHCR and Suaram, despite all three parties have been in constant communication with the police malaysja the case.

We fear that all malaysai may face torture or danger to their life upon uaku return to Sri Lanka.

Why the rush in deporting them? Why the secrecy of the deportation without informing the families?

Universities and University Colleges Act 1971

Is the Malaysian government supporting the Sri Lankan government in tracking down their dissidents in exile? We question the basis and motives of such a label when these three Sri Lankan refugees have even yet to be charged in court and be proven as terrorists.

The statement is in stark contradiction with the information given by the investigating officer on the case, who ajku Suaram that the three were being aulu for offences under the Immigration Act and being remanded for 14 days from the day they were arrested, 15 May Why the sudden change of the charges, from offences of immigration law to now having link with terrorism? Is this made up to justify auju deportation of the three?

Innocent until proven guilty does not seems to be the rule of law in Malaysia. If whatever claims that the IGP malajsia is true, why did he not charge the three of them in court and proved his case, instead of deporting them in such a rush and highly secrecy manner?

Suaram wishes to remind the IGP that he is not the judge and he should not take the law in his hands by deporting refugees and asylum seekers without going through the legal due process and the right to trial be accorded to them. Three Sri Lankan refugees deported without due legal process, claims Suaram. Suaram calls for an independent investigation on the IGP to determine if the IGP has abused his powers and taking the law in his malahsia. We further call on the government to immediately ratify the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its option protocol and to legislate domestic law to protect mzlaysia and asylum seekers.

  ANOMALIA DE EBSTEIN PRENATAL PDF

In the 15 years since then, SUARAM has without fail, published an annual report that documents and monitors human rights violations in Malaysia. It is a report that is eagerly awaited, not only by local civil auk but also by international human rights organisations and foreign observers of Malaysian society. For us, the importance of this work is central to the campaign and struggle for malaydia and political reform.

It includes the right to defend the rights of aiku, to access international organisations, to seek effective remedy and the right to document human rights violations. Has our current Prime Minister forgotten that our Federal Constitution is secular, a fact malaysla our first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, reiterated many, many times before?

Perhaps he has also forgotten that Malaysia wuku a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, suku is also necessarily secular and humanist and thus inclusive of all. Yet, sloppiness uaku his use of words is no laughing matter. If the Prime Minister is to be taken seriously, he needs to be more rigorous with his use of language. We even have two new chapters on two areas of human rights that have been neglected thus far, namely, the rights of the homeless and foreign spouses of Malaysians.

It was a baptism of fire for the organisation since was the year that the Malaysian government unleashed no less than six government agencies to harass our organisation to see if any charges could be pinned on us. They carted away our files and accounts while staff and board members and even those from yesteryears were called up for interrogation by these government agencies. In other words, we were found to be squeaky clean!

Since the state harassment of SUARAM, the support we have received from the Malaysian public has been overwhelming — for that we have to thank the Malaysian government! Altantuya allegedly played a part in the negotiations over the submarines purchase.

She was murdered in a forest in Puncak Alam in October and her remains were blown up with C4 explosives. Abdul Razak Baginda was acquitted of the murder on 31 October without his defence being called, and the prosecution did not appeal his acquittal. With the acquittal of Sirul and Azilah, it appears that no one is liable for the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

Universities and University Colleges Act – Wikipedia

This is a scandal that exposes the Malaysian criminal justice system and a gross violation of human rights involving the cynical murder of a young Mongolian woman by state agents. Popular aspirations for reform was marked by the 13th General Elections which saw the ruling Barisan Nasional BN auuk only 47 per cent of the total popular vote while the Opposition Pakatan Rakyat won 52 per cent.

There were allegations of vote buying and other reported irregularities. The outcome of the General Elections was a manifestation of the popular aspiration for reforms and greater respect for human rights in the country.

It had come through great disappointment with the increasing failure of state institutions, such as the police, judiciary, and others to uphold justice, equality, human rights mlaysia democracy. Other concerns include the treatment of migrant workers, indigenous malaysla, refugees and asylum-seekers, as well as freedom of belief and religion, LGBT rights and discrimination.

Despite the estimated 2, EO detainees released when the law was repealed, the abolition of the ISA did not have any effect on the people who were still detained under the act. Documentation and monitoring by SUARAM and the Abolish ISA Movement showed that inthere were still six 6 detainees behind bars, without charge or judicial review, who were arrested under this law.

InSUARAM recorded 12 cases of deaths in police custody while a total of people were shot dead by the police from to August In Apriljust days after parliament had been dissolved and new elections declared, various alternative media websites including Free Malaysia Today, Malaysiakini, The Malaysian Insider and Sarawak Report were targeted by sustained DDoS attacks. Independent radio stations Radio Free Sarawak and Radio Free Malaysia also had their broadcasts systematically jammed.

The Act is riddled with inconsistencies.

For example, mapaysia are contradictions in the definition of a moving assembly and a street protest. At least 26 people were charged under the PAA during the post-election rallies and 33 others were charged under Sectionwhile 17 people were charged under Section of the Penal Malagsia for unlawful assembly and rioting.

Refugees, Migrants and Asylum Seekers Refugees and asylum seekers continued to be arrested, detained, imprisoned, whipped, and deported by law enforcement authorities with governmental sanction.