Although Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia did not give me any reasons for the termination of my contract in July 2005, its vice-chancellor Mohamad Salleh Yasin has subsequently said my academic track record, personality and discipline were the contributing factors.

However, the VC has revealed to some reliable sources in the university that my termination was related to my recent involvement in the Helsinki peace talks between Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM) and Indonesia. Why the VC does not want to disclose the real reasons is not clear. Is he under pressure from the higher authorities or does he seriously thinks that he could get away by offering overnight manufactured answers?

The VC's comment about my academic track record and the lack of personality sounds extremely ludicrous if not childish. Well, if academic reasons were used to terminate me, then the same criteria should apply equally to all academic staff and there is possibility more than 98 percent of the staff stands to be terminated, including the VC himself. There is no necessity to spell out my academic and intellectual credentials, it is well known to many.

Perhaps it is about time that the VC should elaborate on the academic standing of the university and why many deadwoods continue to be re-employed on the grounds of certain relationships.

Personality and discipline were the other reasons cited by the VC for my termination.

For the past 25 years, the university top administration has never made it known to the academic staff as to the kind of personalities they need for promotion and academic retention. For example, the way a person should be attired, the university's code of behaviour and the guidelines that should be adhered by the academic staff and those who aspire to be retained by the university.

Similarly, the notion of discipline conjures an image that I have disciplinary problem. In the past, I have explained and refuted allegations against me that came via the issuance of warning letters by the administration. I strongly believe that the VC should really come out and speak the truth as to why I was terminated rather than trying to say all kinds of things.

The peace talks

A few days back, I heard from reliable sources that my termination was related to my recent involvement in the Helsinki peace talks between GAM and Indonesia. Over the years, I have developed a keen interest in studying and understanding ethnic conflicts in places like Sri Lanka, Aceh, Papua and Sudan.

I attended the Helsinki peace talks as an observer to understand how the two parties approached the question of final settlement. However, when I came back to Malaysia, I was requested to meet the chief secretary of the Higher Education Ministry. In a rather cordial meeting, I was told that Indonesia had complained to the Foreign Affairs Ministry (Wisma Putra) that I had acted as an advisor to GAM in Helsinki.

However, when I explained to him about the real purpose of my visit and my status as an observer, he was quite pleased. Subsequently I wrote him a letter explaining my position and in his reply he basically agreed with my position - that I was not an advisor of GAM but was merely present in Helsinki as an observer. Anyway he advised me from attending similar meetings in the future as they might be negatively construed.

If the chief secretary of the Higher Education Ministry has cleared me, I don't see why the university's board should be bothered about my presence in Helsinki. I was there merely to observe and gather data for my forthcoming comparative study of the peace process in Aceh and Sri Lanka.

To date, I have given a number of talks on the impact of the tsunami on the peace process in Aceh and Sri Lanka in Norway and Finland. I have also written a few articles on the nature of the peace process in these two places. The university is well aware that I was appointed as an expert in the constitutional affairs committee of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in 2003. I was entrusted with other members to draw up a proposal for the establishment of an interim self-governing authority for the northeast of Sri Lanka.

If the university has terminated me because of my involvement in the Helsinki peace talks, then I am sad to say that its decision is narrow-minded, myopic and anti-intellectual. I merely attended the talks, just like a few others, as an observer, although some parties construed my presence quite differently. Anyway I have cleared the matter with the Higher Education Ministry, a fact that his known to the university and the vice-chancellor himself. I have the necessary documents especially the exchange between me and the chief secretary to prove that there was no bad intention on my part.

What makes me sad is that university has overreacted to my presence in Helsinki. The university should have asked me for an explanation. Since I was appointed on a monthly contract basis, they probably believed that they could simply terminate me without reasons. In this respect, I believe, even if the university has certain discretionary powers over its contract staff, it doesn't mean that it could exercise its powers arbitrarily and unjustly.

Little autonomy

The abrupt, unjust and arbitrary termination of my contract raises serious implications about the nature of public universities in Malaysia. First, public universities basically operate under the shadow of the Higher Education Ministry, with very little autonomy and space.

Second, those in command of these universities are basically persons without any strong academic and intellectual background to steer universities on a dynamic and ethical path. Vice-chancellors of public universities have been appointed merely to shoulder administrative and bureaucratic responsibilities; they have little or no capacity to push universities in a progressive direction.

Third, the autonomy and academic freedom so essential for the pursuit of knowledge have been seriously compromised in the public universities.

Unless and until there is total revamp of the public universities, there is very little the Malaysian public can expect from them. Universities should be centres for education, debate, reflections and critical thinking to ensure students obtain the necessary epistemological tools.

However, over the last 40 years or so, politicians and bureaucrats have turned universities into less than high schools. Those managing universities are basically bureaucrats, their loyalty is only to their political masters.

P RAMASAMY was professor of political economy at the Centre for History, Political Science and Strategic Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.