THIS is an open letter from the Universiti Malaya Students’ Union (UMSU) to the administration of Universiti Malaya, in particular towards the Universiti Malaya Student Affairs Division (BHEP) regarding the latest issues surrounding the welfare of students, primarily, the UMSU Rental House (Rumah Sewa KMUM or also known as RSKMUM) and other related matters.
BHEP has always claimed that its primary concern is regarding the students. The main duty of BHEP, that it has been entrusted with, is to look after the welfare of the students, ensuring that the interests of students are safeguarded and empowered. However, UMSU would like to express our disappointment and dissatisfaction towards BHEP in finding the solution over the issue of RSKMUM. We are of the impression and strongly feel that BHEP has failed to show its sincerity in solving the RSKMUM issue, which was suddenly taken away from UMSU, and BHEP’s credibility in handling the issue is quite dubious with an overwhelming lack of transparency.
In this regard, UMSU would like to present ten (10) facts as justification towards UMSU’s loss of trust and patience over BHEP’s action, which can be described as untowardly and a total lack of carelessness in executing its responsibility and duties to safeguard the welfare and interests of the students of Universiti Malaya (UM).
‘Surplus’ houses
First, BHEP has alleged that RSKMUM cannot be returned to UMSU because the houses are needed to be used as residences for UM employees. However, after UMSU carried out a survey, it was found that there are other houses besides RSKMUM that are empty and unoccupied till now.
The question is, why does BHEP refuse to maintain and repair these surplus houses so that they can be used as residences for UM employees? Why does the BHEP choose to drive out the B40 students who were unfortunate enough to secure a spot in the residential colleges and cannot afford to pay the high cost of renting an off-campus accommodation when there are other alternatives to solve the issue of accommodation for UM’s employees?
‘Agreement lacks signature’
Second, in a tripartite meeting conducted on the August 19, 2022 between UMSU, BHEP and
the Higher Education Ministry (MoHE), BHEP claimed that previously there was an agreement on the issue of RSKMUM between UMSU and BHEP since the formation of the RSKMUM initiative back in 2019. However, the agreement lacks the signature of BHEP even though other formalities such as documentation has been done and BHEP in the meeting has said that the agreement that was done in the past is not valid. As such, KMUM is on the stance that the statement made by BHEP is merely their personal opinion and not one made under the advice of professional opinion such as legal counsel on the issue that the RSKMUM’s contract agreement was made much earlier. In addition, BHEP has failed to provide or adduce relevant evidence to support their claim on the agreement or financial statements to be shown to MoHE and KMUM during the meeting.
Contradictory statements
Third, in the same meeting, BHEP has claimed to MoHE that their justification in taking over RSKMUM is their solution which will be brought to the University Management Committee (JKPU) based on the audit results that they have conducted. However, in the first meeting between UMSU and BHEP on the 21st of July 2022, BHEP has stated that the taking back of RSKMUM is done by the University Management Committee (JKPU) themselves and not BHEP.
In other words, the statements being made by BHEP are self-contradicting and give two different versions of narratives during the meeting. It can be concluded that BHEP would like to manipulate the students with the contradicting statements that were made. Next, more contradicting statements were also made in the meeting when the notice from BHEP regarding the taking back of RSKMUM which was sent to UMSU with the other details on the discussion made with UMSU about that issue was found to be inaccurate. BHEP was acting in a very careless manner and was being manipulative when they were presenting about RSKMUM in the meeting together with MoHE.
Status of funds channelled by MP
Fourth, in 2019, the MP for Lembah Pantai (YB Ahmad Fahmi bin Mohamed Fadzil) had channelled RM220,000 to UMSU for the purpose of renovating and maintaining RSKMUM. This huge sum was given by him as he had much trust and confidence in UMSU being able to manage the money during the 2019/2020 tenure.
In legal terms, UMSU had played the role of a trustee for the money provided. However, due to restrictions based on the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA), the money was to be channelled to UM’s account as it cannot be held in the hands of UMSU. During that period, UMSU has repeatedly made appeals to BHEP to present the financial statements for the funds that was used for the purpose of maintaining RSKMUM to ensure that the sum was not misappropriated and it was being managed effectively.
UMSU was on the stance that since UMSU was the trustee for the sum of RM220,000 and as the representatives of the students (as a stakeholder), UMSU has the right to be shown how the money was managed and the remaining sum from it.
Unfortunately, never once did BHEP entertain UMSU’s wishes nor did they show a clear picture on the financial statement of RSKMUM to UMSU. This action of UMSU was quite alarming on whether the funds were being properly used. The actions of BHEP can be deemed as suspicious as their actions indicate they would like to hide the financial statements of RSKMUM which was received from external donations and fundings.
In this regard, UMSU believes that UMSU has the absolute right to be notified about the current status of the money and UMSU has the merit to manage the excess money from the allocated sum. Previously, the rental money collected from the rent of RSKMUM was used to stock up for the Food Bank initiative in addition to being used as subsidy for clubs and associations and other purposes. It is clear that the money being spent by UMSU is for the welfare of the students. Furthermore, the transaction records are being documented and presented to BHEP in a transparent manner to show the capability of UMSU in managing money without misappropriating it.
Furthermore, UMSU feels the need for the rental money collected from RSKMUM to be managed by UMSU and not BHEP. In the event of any urgent renovation or maintenance work that has to be done in any of the houses, the director of the RSKMUM Committee can quickly find a contractor to fix the issue compared to the Department of Development & Estate Maintenance (JPPHB) to fix the issue.
A faster response to the issue can be done instead of relying upon BHEP and JPPHB. The lateness and delays which are synonymous with BHEP and JPPHB due to the long bureaucratic process such as making a complaint to the Helpdesk and waiting for a response long after can be quickened. If RSKMUM were to rely on JPPHB, the issue would fester and cause even more damage before a response from JPPHB is received.
Difficulties faced by tenants
Fifth, BHEP has repeatedly failed to understand the severity of the burdens faced by the tenants living in RSKMUM. BHEP has stated that the current tenants will be guaranteed a spot in the residential colleges and is willing to cooperate to facilitate the process of giving back of RSKMUM to UMSU but there are many legal obstacles and hurdles that are being faced by UMSU that has to be complied with.
UMSU has repeatedly notified BHEP that UMSU is willing to cooperate and ready the required documents. In lieu of that, it is only just and proper to give an extension of stay for the current tenants instead of leaving the houses empty which are currently fit to be used. The tenants also face the difficulty of finding suitable accommodation outside as well as the issue that there are inadequate residential spots for students. However, BHEP has ordered UMSU to return RSKMUM to them and to vacate the houses. The reason being given is that, since the notice to return RSKMUM has been made, the houses must be returned to them.
Tardiness contributing to burden
Sixth, besides the issue of RSKMUM, BHEP shows very little credibility and a lack of efficiency in dealing with issues regarding the students. UMSU has been working together with BHEP and are dismayed by the progress shown by BHEP in approving subsidies and financial claims.
Such delays, with up to a length of six months are burdening. In addition to that, BHEP is rather slow in responding to emails sent to them and this causes delays in organising activities and programmes by clubs and societies.
Next, it is also BHEP who was responsible for setting the criteria for the selection of students for residential colleges. One of the criteria which was set was merit marks based on the activities joined by the students. However, BHEP was very late in keying in the merit marks of the students and it was still in process while selection for residential colleges was already ongoing. This has caused injustice towards students who are supposed to receive high merit marks but became victims due to the delay and inefficiency shown by BHEP.
Seventh, both BHEP and JPPHB have neglected their duties to safeguard the interests of B40 students. Instead of upgrading services and infrastructures to improve the lives of students especially to improve the conditions for B40 students, BHEP has chosen to establish a premium college where they are able to maximise their profits which is very selfish and only fulfils their own personal interest.
JPPHB since the beginning has planned to charge high rental fees for premium college as the university administration would stand to profit well from it. Due to this, UMSU is of the opinion that the wellbeing and interests of the B40 must be prioritised instead of planning to maximise their profits through various schemes.
Short time frame for applications
Eight, BHEP has been very late in opening the application for residential colleges and has delayed the release of the application results. This delay and late schedule has caused major inconveniences towards the students as they have to find accommodation outside if their applications are rejected. BHEP only opened the application two months prior to the commencement of the new semester and the results of it were only known about a month before the new semester. This short time frame is very troublesome for students to find accommodation as it could be very stressful for them for they would have to make arrangements to deposit money in addition to finding rooms or houses within their means.
With the total number of students not getting residential college amounting to 10,000, it is quite the hassle. The untimeliness by BHEP is regarded by UMSU as one of lacking proper consideration. BHEP was also being unrealistic by changing the dates to their own preference, showing their lack of care towards the students.
If BHEP were to think about it, how are students able to prepare financially to look for an accommodation outside which is within their means, carrying out surveys at multiple areas, negotiating with homeowners and agents, and signing agreements with landlords within the short period of one month.
If BHEP is aware that they are unable to accommodate such a large number of students in the campus’ residential colleges, they should at least make a proper schedule on the application and release of results so that the rejected students are able to make enough arrangements to find accommodation outside.
Misunderstanding, conflicting instructions
Ninth, there has been serious misunderstandings which have happened among the administration of UM, especially among the staff of BHEP and in the other departments such as the Information Technology Centre (PTM), Department of Maintenance and Development (JPPHB) and so on. The problem was clearly shown during the meeting between UMSU and BHEP on August 18, 2022. The misunderstanding and issuing of conflicting instructions has caused unwanted confusion towards the students, which has caused the slow processing of student applications and several U-Turns made by BHEP. The vice chancellor of HEP (TNC HEP) has admitted that the problem had occurred a few times. In the end, it is the students who fall victim to such actions by the UM administration.
Election for College Action Committee
Tenth, in the meeting on the August 10, 2022, BHEP has agreed to give the “greenlight” for UMSU to conduct the residential college election. The purpose of holding this residential college election is to establish a College Action Committee (JTK) through a transparent voting process and avoid the problem of cronyism in the appointment of JTK. However, till today, there is no written approval granted to UMSU yet.
If BHEP does not agree with the holding of such an election, they should not have given false hopes to UMSU during the meeting. The attitude of BHEP in not keeping to their promises which happens frequently clearly shows their failure and this has caused the loss of trust towards BHEP.
Long- and short-term demands
In conclusion, the 10 facts listed above shows the justification that the administration of UM especially by BHEP and JPPHB as a body and entity which has failed to keep their promises repeatedly, ineffective in resolving difficulties and problems faced by students, indifferent to their welfare issues, conceited, and unwelcoming to the students.
Even though the university administration has repeatedly issued statements to the media such as the newspapers that they would strive to take care of the welfare of the students, they are all empty statements. When it comes to protecting the rights and welfare of UM students, the administration is actually negligent and lacking in sincerity, particularly when it comes to handing back control of RSKMUM to KMUM to help students in the B40 group who were rejected from residential college admission.
Therefore, KMUM demands that:
For the long term:
- The Finance Ministry should allocate funding for the construction of more residential colleges across IPTAs to ensure at least 70% students can be accommodated in affordable hostel rooms;
- Likewise, the Higher Education Ministry needs to ensure that the current academic infrastructure, be it in terms of facilities or academic staff, is sufficient to accommodate the current influx of students; In fact, students in general would like to see more funding allocated to the higher education sector in Budget 2023;
- Guarantee the empowerment of UM students’ freedom of speech and association as well as autonomy and participation in campus matters notwithstanding the draconian law AUKU. This is because students need to be trained as leaders by empowering the freedom of speech, so that they would have spoken up for themselves rather than leaving issues to be sidelined by the Student Affairs Unit.
For the short term:
- UM must return Rumah Sewa KMUM (RSKMUM) and open up KK10 and KK13 to accommodate more students who are affected by the lack of placement capacity;
- Targeted aid must be given to eligible B40 students who have failed to get residential college placements;
Furthermore, we also demand that UM:
- Allow the student leaders to run and implement the UM College Election Committee;
- Allow UMSU to have administrative control over Kompleks Perdana Siswa as an activity space;
- Allow UMSU to manage the Principal’s House as student accommodation or as an activity space;
- Improve the operational aspects and working hours of the UM student clinic; and
- Give justice to all sexual harassment cases at UM. – The Vibes, September 11, 2022
This is the text of an open letter, dated yesterday, by the Universiti Malaya Students’ Union (UMSU) for the 2022/2023 session, and addressed to the vice-chancellor of UM
