A few days ago, I attended a discussion entitled 'Membedah Pilihanraya Kampus 2003' (Dissecting the 2003 Campus Elections) organised by (self-styled student movement) Universiti Bangsar Utama.

The informal discussion brought together students representing the pro-government faction (pro-aspirasi kerajaan), the pro-opposition Muslim Students' Association (PMI) aligned to PAS, and the so-called 'independent' students - those not aligned to either grouping.

Campus elections in Malaysia usually attract the interest of political analysts because the process is said to represent a proxy fight between Umno/BN and the PAS-led opposition front.

Although the strength of the student movement has dwindled considerably of late, the results of the elections often provide a much-needed 'moral victory' for the winning side.

Campus elections have been dominated by PMI in most major universities. It has always been noted that students are a major factor in the organisational strength of PAS - volunteering in its election campaign, distributing leaflets in electoral constituencies and providing intellectual support towards policy proposals.

This has certainly provided PAS with not only a morale-booster, but also a ready layer of future leaders. This has been evident with the steady growth of professional members within PAS.

Their influence does not stop here. Organisations like Hizbi in the UK are also aligned to PAS. Their influence among Malaysian students there has grown especially after the sacking of Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim in 1998, which led to the crippling of Umno Clubs.

Given this background, it is not surprising that Umno/BN are desperate to gain the upper hand in local campuses. As such, organisations like Pemuda and Puteri Umno have been seen working hard to win over students.

Real challenge

Although it appears that their efforts have failed to pay off over the past two years, unseen hands have begun taking control of the electoral process on several campuses.

The Independent Student Resource and Legal Training Centre has compiled a book that documents what it describes as "election irregularities" in the 2003 outing. It alleges that:

  • Candidates were not allowed to present their manifesto to the electorate.
  • Candidates were given a very short campaign period.
  • The election commission in certain universities was biased in the distribution of campaign banners.
  • Students were threatened with expulsion from their college is they did not vote for the pro-aspirasi faction
  • There were discriminatory practices in conducting raids on students' rooms.
  • The serial number of each ballot paper was read out aloud along with the name of the voter, hence abusing the right to a secret vote.

Many so-called 'pro-opposition' students claimed that they were not merely contesting against the pro-aspirasi students in the elections, but were, in reality, up against the administrators of the university.

"In the past, even though the competition was mainly pro-aspirasi versus PMI, we fought them one-on-one. But this time, we were fighting against the Hal Ehwal Pelajar (student affairs) office in what was the dirtiest campus election ever," claimed a Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia student.

As a result, he alleged, the pro-aspirasi faction won in some universities that were previously PMI strongholds.

"If they had won the elections fairly it would not have been an issue, but we believe they won because of the blatant electoral abuses," the student added.

Student partisanship

It seems quite clear to me, then, that the biggest issue here is the abuse of the electoral process. When the university administration clearly favours one side, the election can no longer be considered free and fair, and hence the results cannot be deemed to be credible.

However, at the UBU discussion, some students (particularly those proclaiming to be 'independent' students), pointed out another issue which deserved attention - partisanship among students.

"Why is it that student politics take on the Umno vs PAS mould? Why can't students be independent and free their mind from this structural failure that is partisan politics?" asked a UBU member.

The PMI representative took pains to explain that his group has been "labelled" as pro-PAS, but that the students were neither really supporters of the party nor aspiring members.

"In fact, in the last elections, we followed the rules and contested as individuals. Each of us prepared our own election manifesto," he said.

"However, the pro-aspirasi faction did not even bother to make that distinction. They all used the same manifesto even though it is clear they are not allowed to contest under any alliance."

Undeterred, the UBU student argued that there is a need to "cleanse" student politics of partisan alignments and to rid them of political labels.

"It is pathetic that Malaysian students cannot seem to think for themselves and must always be directed by political parties in their struggles. Students must be able to think for themselves. We must aim to purify the student movement again," he said.

Glaring flaw

The majority of students at the discussion obviously bought this argument hook, line and sinker. By the end, the groups agreed that their first plan of action to counter the problems of the last campus election would be to write to all political parties, asking them to stop interfering in campus politics.

I see many flaws to this argument, and I am surprised none of the students who were at this talk seemed able to pick out the most glaring one of all.

The student movement in Malaysia has, all these years, been fighting against the draconian provisions of the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA). Even the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia is of the opinion that the law is against human rights.

So, what these students suggested was a step backwards. By writing to political parties, they would be reinforcing what UUCA says - that students in Malaysia do not have the right to engage in politics. Malaysian students overseas are not bound by the law, by the way.

Is it not bizarre that all the struggle has suddenly come to this? Students are themselves clamoring for the UUCA to be imposed on them more stringently just so that their struggle can be deemed to be 'pure'!

Students' political consciousness does not arise in a vacuum. A student does not choose to lean a certain way in his or her political outlook, completely devoid of social and political influences.

When a student enters university, he or she may (or may not) have developed a political consciousness that is aligned to a specific political party, be it PAS, Umno, DAP or Keadilan.

As such, it is the student's right to choose to espouse any party's political ideology. No one has the right to say that this makes the struggle any less 'pure' than one without a particular alignment.

Of course, if there are students who do indeed have a different political ideology than those offered by the political parties, then they are free to espouse that ideology on a platform of their choosing.

Political parties exist for a reason, and it is a strategic political institution which brings together people of a certain similar political consciousness. Hence, the mere fact that an Umno, a PAS, a DAP and a Keadilan exist is because it represents a segment of our society who believe in that struggle.

Conscious choice

It seems to me that these students have no confidence in being able to make a conscious political choice. If they are seen to support PAS, the implication is that they are merely being used by PAS for the party's political end-goal.

It says nothing about the student's right to choose to support PAS, and it gives no indication of his or her ability to influence policy decisions in PAS, as a student representative.

This is different in the UK, for example. It is quite common for students in UK universities to contest under a political party affiliation. Hence, you will find Conservative Future, Labour Students and Young Liberal Democrats candidates in a campus election.

This label serves as a strategic alignment to indicate their stand of various political issues. However, this does not mean that they are being manipulated by the main party.

When the Labour government of Prime Minister Tony Blair wanted to introduce top-up fees for local students, the Labour Students organised a nationwide march against the decision. In fact, their voice is considered to be even more influential among top Labour leaders precisely because they are from the ranks of the party's base of support.

Malaysian students, therefore, must have the same kind of confidence that their voice is just as influential. They must not allow themselves to believe that their struggle is less 'pure' if they are aligned to a political party.

Instead, they must fight for their right to choose to be aligned to any political party. Of course, they should also have a right to choose to be non-partisan should they so wish.

At the end of the day, students must not be derailed or lose track of their major and common struggle - to fight for the abolition of UUCA, which has crippled intellectual life in universities and gravely undermined the rights of students.

Towards the end of the discussion that night, one student sighed, "Why do we let ourselves be manipulated by political parties?"

To which an enlightened student would have answered: "We will only be manipulated if we allow ourselves to be treated that way. But we students are smart and we are not nave, we can always use our position to influence policy decisions and direction of political parties. That is after all, what democracy is all about.

"If we back down and agree that political parties are the source of our problems in campus elections, then we will only reinforce the belief that students are stupid and spineless and give the authorities every reason to further erode our rights in universities!"

Unfortunately, no such answer was forthcoming that night.

KARIENA ABDULLAH, a graduate of University of London, frequently writes for reformasi publications.