How About An Audit Of The Vc Appointments Process

---

 


A couple of weeks ago (Feb 13), I wrote a column suggesting that it is time to be serious about the appointment of university vice-chancellors (VC), sparked by the abrupt resignation of a VC then.
Reportedly, the police have taken action on the case, indicating there is enough to deep dive into the search for the truth. After all, the said VC himself also lodged a report with the police after resigning from the post.
The issue must be serious enough that voices in Parliament urged the government to expedite the matter so that the higher education sector can be saved from further demoralisation.
It worsened when the royal honorific title bestowed by a royal was withdrawn from the VC to “uphold the dignity” of the royal institution.
Many were awed by the boldness of the action taken since it has never happened before in the history of higher education in the country. Instead, the opposite happened when the title of Royal Professor was awarded for the first time to the country’s foremost academic, who was also a vice-chancellor.
Downward spiral
The contrast simply shows how the current Higher Education Ministry has been awkward in its role to appoint people worthy of the lofty position. As it is today, the process is fast plummeting to a new low, thanks to the present practices leading up to the mess we are in right now.
Hence, it comes as no surprise when the media exposed how the minister concerned tried to sidestep the issue by claiming it as “too sensitive”. More so, in the face of Parliament, whose core business is to look into various “sensitive” issues on numerous occasions before.
It is for this very reason that parliamentary debates are not shielded from all sorts of defamatory remarks and wild allegations just so that the “truth” can be firmly scrutinised and established.
As a comparison, if the so-called 3R issues (race, religion, royalty) which are officially regarded as “sensitive” and seditious can get aired fully in Parliament, who is any minister to (mis)label any issue as “too sensitive” if not for the sake of self-interest and ego-centricity?
What is more, if the royal decree to unceremoniously withdraw the honorific title from the VC is not deemed as “too sensitive”, can just anyone willy-nilly designate this and that as “too sensitive”, much to the chagrin of the nation?
In reality, it resulted in the opening of Pandora’s Box and provoking demands for utmost transparency from a minister since the rakyat paid for the minister’s salary and other perks!
The minister must tender a public apology if he wants to keep his job or step down, as he had fallen far short of the standards expected of him.
Matter of integrity
Be that as it may, the so-called ministerial “too sensitive” remark is indeed really “sensitive” as Parliament had been made a mockery of.
Anyone working in the education sector must not be naive or act ignorant as to how brutal the academic world is in safeguarding its integrity against all sorts of charlatans, especially the good-for-nothing political versions.
Even world-class university presidents were asked to vacate their positions when the ethical red line was breached, what more lowly politicians who seem to have no idea what the academe is all about other than to secure votes (in this case not even that!) by asserting this and that.
For example, it is easy to preach that universities should be “human transformers” and “cultural builders” when, in reality, it is just the reverse, putting them under wraps as “too sensitive” when it is convenient to do so.
In such a situation, the ultimate options are either to come clean in meeting the highest standards of integrity and ethics of academia or do nothing to allay the emerging doubts and suspicions that breed a toxic and repressive culture throughout higher education!
In choosing the former, apologies to the chancellor are imperative; and as for the latter, the VC implicated must come forward to urgently detoxify the growing unethical culture before the higher education sector is burnt out and rots like a fish from the head downwards.
In summary, the unwarranted “too sensitive” remark must not be allowed to be normalised as lame excuses to cover up irresponsible acts in fooling the public from knowing the “truth”.
This cowardly act to survive must be urgently unpacked through a high-level independent audit on the appointments of all VCs since 2004. No approach can be dubbed as “too sensitive” to arrive at the “truth”.
It is the only way left to bring back dignity to the academe and hold the culprit(s) accountable openly. - Mkini
DZULKIFLI ABDUL RAZAK was vice-chancellor of the International Islamic University Malaysia.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---