KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 24 — Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) has rejected accusations that two of its academics are misrepresenting facts related to Malay maritime history.

In a statement published last night, the university said the research journal has been peer-reviewed by experts in the field.

“UPM takes note of the concerns of the community at mass media regarding the confusion of the findings of The Jongs and The Galleys study: Traditional Ships of the Past Malay Maritime Civilization that has been carried out by researchers from UPM.

“Articles that have been published in relevant journals are listed in ERA database has a blind peer reviewed, refereed journal policy means that this research journal has been reviewed by experts in the field, who are unrelated with the researcher to avoid conflicts of interest to confirm findings.


“In this situation, UPM takes the allegations directed at the university. As this research is academic in nature, UPM is of the view it is appropriate that this issue be discussed in the academic space,” it said.

UPM said the field of social sciences and humanities is open to various interpretations, which is a good practice for studies like this for the purpose of improvement.

Last Monday, the New Straits Times reported a French historian Serge Jardin, accusing two UPM academics Rozita Che Rodi and Hashim Musa of distorting facts related to Malay maritime history and questioning the credibility of the academic journal it was published in.


In a Facebook post, Jardin claimed that an image used in the paper said to be a model of a Malay Jong, a sailing ship from Java, Indonesia, used by Javanese, Sundanese, and later Peguan and Malay sailors, was actually that of a Foochow Pole Junk from China.