OCTOBER 18 — The Statement by Hafiz Hassan refers questioning the statement made by the National Human Rights Society (Hakam).
He states that the provision in section 56 of the UM Constitution defining “scandalous conduct” for which a degree can be revoked is wider than section 53 of the Constitution set out in the schedule to the Universities and University Colleges Act, which Hakam cited.
Section 56 as he set out is: “scandalous conduct” is defined as including wilfully giving any information or document which is false or misleading in any material particular to the University for the purpose of obtaining such degree, diploma, certificate or other academic distinction [emphasis added].
Section 53 reads as follows: Scandalous conduct... means wilfully giving any officer, employee or Authority of the University any information or document which is false or misleading in any material particular in obtaining a degree, diploma, certificate or other academic distinction from the University.
It is crystal clear that there is no material difference between the 2 provisions.
It is also crystal clear that the University must adopt the Constitution that is set out in the schedule; or set out in its constitution “all the matters set out in the schedule”. And, as he admits, it must remove any provision that is inconsistent with that set out in the schedule. That’s why the wording of section 56(2) of the Constitution mirrors that of section 53(2) in defining “scandalous conduct”.
Finally, his statement also makes it clear that the Senate has no power to revoke a student’s degree. That essentially was the thrust of Hakam’s statement in refuting the contention of the National Professors Council to the contrary.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
