What is the impact of repealing AUKU?

The Malaysian government's proposal to repeal the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (AUKU) represents a major and historic policy shift. This potential reform opens avenues for Malaysia to reassess the relationship between the government, universities, the academic community, and students, after over five decades of public higher education operating under the current legal framework. The National Consultative Council (MPN) views this reform initiative positively but stresses the need for a meticulous, phased approach guided by the nation's long-term interests.

The core principle for this reform should be "Repeal and Replace," meaning a new framework must be established before AUKU is abolished, rather than repealing it without a successor. Discussions surrounding AUKU have often centered on student freedom, campus political activities, and disciplinary actions. However, the Act's scope is far broader, providing the legal foundation for the establishment and administration of most public universities, including the roles of University Boards, Senates, Vice-Chancellors, financial management, academic powers, and institutional regulations. Therefore, AUKU cannot be repealed in a manner that creates a legal and governance vacuum, jeopardizing the operations of public universities, the validity of academic decisions, asset management, contracts, leadership appointments, and accountability for public funds.

Balancing autonomy and accountability is crucial. UNESCO's 1997 Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel recognizes institutional autonomy as essential for academic freedom and a prerequisite for universities to fulfill their responsibilities. UNESCO defines autonomy as the degree of self-governance necessary for universities to make effective decisions regarding academic affairs, standards, management, and related activities. Crucially, UNESCO also emphasizes that autonomy must be accompanied by public accountability, especially when universities receive state funding. Autonomy should not be used to diminish the rights of academics, evade responsibility, or shield management weaknesses. The proposed new act must safeguard both autonomy and accountability; autonomy without accountability can lead to misuse, while accountability without autonomy can devolve into control and interference.

In many Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, governments have shifted from direct operational control of universities to a "steering from a distance" approach. This involves the government setting national policies, funding frameworks, quality standards, and strategic targets, while granting universities considerable freedom in managing academic affairs, administration, human resources, and resource allocation. The OECD perspective highlights that autonomy should not replace human judgment or professional responsibility; digital platforms cannot substitute for an unmotivated workforce or integrity, and artificial intelligence cannot replace sound judgment and empathy.