“Today’s decision turns Miranda upside down. Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent -- which, counterintuitively, requires them to speak.” - Justice Sonia Sotomayor, [ Bloomberg News ]
Let's hear it from Dr Sharifah Hapsah. Will she remain silent? Or will she put away those robes for a change in clothes and say it?
Either way, it's a decision only she can make.
Who will "mirandize" to the Vice Chanceller?
BTW, who is on trial? :)
RELATED ARTICLES:
Silence of the Mahasiswa
Education Malaysia
UKM | Square pegs in round holes
UKM | Students fight for their turf
3 comments:
"Or will she put away those robes for a change in clothes and say it?"
- You must be joking! The woman will not only lose her job tomorrow, she will have to say goodbye to crutches/pension after 30 years in civil service?
Like rent-collectors all over the country, this spineless scumbag have no conscience, those kids don't matter, her political masters do.
There seems to be some kind of amendments in the ACT, which I'm still trying to find out exactly what.
Here's an interesting comment:
["...Blogger Shawn Tan said...
I'm sorry if I don't appreciate this issue very much, but I am rather confused over a small matter. Since I'm not a lawyer, I'm most likely wrong. But, according to Section 5A(1) of the Act:
5A. (1) The provisions of this Act shall not apply to any higher educational institution with the status of a University which is authorized to be established by an order made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong under subsection (2) and any private higher educational institution conferred with the status of a University or University College under any written law.
This bit thoroughly confuses me as it seems that the UUCA may not apply to all university students in the country.
If it applies to all the students, it stifles freedom of expression in universities when it comes to politically sensitive issues (notice how specific the problem area is), but it does not stop anyone from expressing themselves in other areas. So, I am not too sure how repealing the UUCA will help the universities grow across the board, when you are free to debunk Newton or Einstein if you so wish to already.
Giving students the freedom to formally discuss politically sensitive issues within an academic environment is good (for a small subset whose work or education will benefit from such a discourse), but you don't need to be a card carrying member to discuss these issues.
I guess that the article reveals the main sticking point of the UUCA, which is stopping students from getting organised as a political force. But this raises the question of whom actually benefits from such an organised force. The only potential beneficiaries are the political parties that benefit from all the free grunts [grants?].
I must apologise if I seem a bit cynical about this but I don't quite see what the big deal is with the UUCA. There are far bigger problems in the universities than getting the students organised. I see the UUCA as a superficial act while the problems in our universities run much deeper...."]
If a Malaysian genius tomorrow or whenever can debunk Einstein or whoever and come up with a new theory what's so great about any ruling government of the day???
Have to find out what exactly is this amendment.
As for the Vice Chancellor, one needs to do a lot of debunking! :D
You have to admit, if all the students stay in their bunks, life would be so blissfully easy for her! ;)
Kind of, everything is written in the stars!?
Jian Lin says -
建霖 has left a new comment on your post "DISAMBIGUATION | UKM, STUDENTS or Malaysia on tria...":
面臨重大的決擇,冷靜是最好的顧問
Google says -
Jian Lin has left a new comment on your post "DISAMBIGUATION | UKM, STUDENTS or Malaysia on tria ...":
Face major choices, cool is the best consultants
Post a Comment