The pledge of loyalty or Aku Janji that is being imposed by the Malaysian government is actually meant to stifle independent and critical thinking - ironically - in institutions in which by their very existence are supposed to motivate and cultivate a progressive mentality.

The government, through institutions of higher learning, instead wants a community of students and lecturers who are mentally docile.

The controversy surrounding the Chinese Language Society in Universiti Sains Malaysia (and similar instances in the other universities) amply illustrates the primary reason why the government is very much in a hurry to push the pledge through.

We can argue that even without the pledge the students are at the mercy of the authorities. But imagine what can happen if they make the pledge. They might not even, for example, be able to make an appeal to the education ministry, much less to other sources like the human rights commission (Suhakam) for help.

This is because these actions constitute, from the Aku Janji perspective, disloyalty to the government and also implies an inability to follow orders.

An enquiring mind, which is what is expected of a university student, would be inclined to ask pressing questions, questions that have social and political significance. And this would include an inclination to question the rationale behind the perpetuation of the draconian Internal Security Act, as what a number of the USM students did.

Is it fair that a student be punished for merely asking serious questions, which is part and parcel of intellectual development?

Aku Janji also has serious implications on the research work and professionalism of university lecturers. For example, how does the government view the work of certain lecturers who try to provide constructive criticisms regarding certain governments economic policies and actions?

Can a lecturer do an independent environmental impact assessment report on a particular development project without being expected to fully cooperate with the government? Or will they be labelled as anti-government?

Certain quarters may argue that the government may not go to such an extent and pose problems to lecturers research and other work. Yes, the government may not, but we also cannot discount that it will not be selective in its application of the pledge either.

Like the ISA, the pledge threatens to cultivate a culture of fear among lecturers and students too. Worse still, it might even instigate a new breed of ampu (apple-polishing) lecturers.

A university that moulds people into being fearful of treading the unbeaten track will not earn the respect that it otherwise deserves. If and when that happens, we might as well forget about the idea of making this country a centre of academic excellence.

No amount of money or impressive mega-project can ever compensate for this tremendous loss of human capital.