So soon, before the haze vanish within a week of it's appearance, the drama at UPM continues into the second phase of latent upheaval. The Sun reported today: UPM students want new inquiry
The group of UPM students that was mobbed and threatened by student council members say the inquiry conducted by the university was unfair and want a "genuinely independent investigation".
Describing the university's five-member panel of inquiry, led by lecturer Prof Dr Abdul Rahman Md Aroff as "biased" and "partial towards the student mob", the Gerakan Mahasiswa Maju or Student Progressive Front (SPF) said it would resort to legal action if the incident was not properly investigated.
In a press conference today (Aug 24, 2006), SPF external coordinator Teh Yee Keong said the inquiry panel's line of questioning did not address the 30 student body members' "thuggish behaviour" during the July 17, 2006, incident, but instead insinuated the SPF was the cause of it.
Teh said the SPF students were asked:
"Why were you chased away by the other students?",
"Why didn't the other students like you?"and
"Did they chase you away because you were not registered?"
Teh said UPM's decision sends out a message that certain students are allowed to be bullies and violent towards others without any repercussions.
Chew Siew Fong, 22, a final-year student and trainee reporter with news portal Merdekareview.com, said in a sworn statement distributed today that Abdul Rahman had told her during the inquiry that the university could not help her if she could not name the student who tried to grab her camera and pushed her and another student.
Chew said when she described the mob's shouting, taunting, advancing and manhandling as "violent", Abdul Rahman declared that that was "not violent", but "rough".
"He also asked me why I took pictures with my camera and proceeded to ask how I would feel if someone else took my picture," she said.
Chew said Abdul Rahman also asked her what her intentions were.
Teh said the group wanted the inquiry panel's findings to be made public, a suggestion UPM opposes.
In an immediate response today, Dr Nik Mustapha told theSun: "We want to put this to rest as we have a bigger agenda to pursue. We hope to close the chapter on this."
Teh added that SPF failed twice this year to register with the university.
Malaysian Undergraduates Solidarity president Mohd Rifaudin Abd Wahab, who was also at the press conference, said the inquiry panel should rightfully comprise academics with legal and investigative skills from other campuses.
In Malaysia, it's not puzzling that dysfunctional members of the system are appointed tocarry out "independent investigation" on the cult members' behaviors. It becomes a foregone presumption that the serendipity would be that victims were partakers of the fracas, for the fact that, they had the blood-type dracula needs to feed and quench his thirst; the dracularic instigators couldn't had done wrong if the thirst was inherent. In finality, the victim would have to be prosecuted and ordered to compensate dracula another 3 pints of blood. As a "token of goodwill gesture" the dysfunctioning system administrators were kind enough to let go the victim if they would be prepared to be taciturn.
Subject matter closed? It had just begun. It's getting insidious and obnoxious.
The group of UPM students that was mobbed and threatened by student council members say the inquiry conducted by the university was unfair and want a "genuinely independent investigation".
Describing the university's five-member panel of inquiry, led by lecturer Prof Dr Abdul Rahman Md Aroff as "biased" and "partial towards the student mob", the Gerakan Mahasiswa Maju or Student Progressive Front (SPF) said it would resort to legal action if the incident was not properly investigated.
In a press conference today (Aug 24, 2006), SPF external coordinator Teh Yee Keong said the inquiry panel's line of questioning did not address the 30 student body members' "thuggish behaviour" during the July 17, 2006, incident, but instead insinuated the SPF was the cause of it.
Teh said the SPF students were asked:
"Why were you chased away by the other students?",
"Why didn't the other students like you?"and
"Did they chase you away because you were not registered?"
Teh said UPM's decision sends out a message that certain students are allowed to be bullies and violent towards others without any repercussions.
Chew Siew Fong, 22, a final-year student and trainee reporter with news portal Merdekareview.com, said in a sworn statement distributed today that Abdul Rahman had told her during the inquiry that the university could not help her if she could not name the student who tried to grab her camera and pushed her and another student.
Chew said when she described the mob's shouting, taunting, advancing and manhandling as "violent", Abdul Rahman declared that that was "not violent", but "rough".
"He also asked me why I took pictures with my camera and proceeded to ask how I would feel if someone else took my picture," she said.
Chew said Abdul Rahman also asked her what her intentions were.
Teh said the group wanted the inquiry panel's findings to be made public, a suggestion UPM opposes.
In an immediate response today, Dr Nik Mustapha told theSun: "We want to put this to rest as we have a bigger agenda to pursue. We hope to close the chapter on this."
Teh added that SPF failed twice this year to register with the university.
Malaysian Undergraduates Solidarity president Mohd Rifaudin Abd Wahab, who was also at the press conference, said the inquiry panel should rightfully comprise academics with legal and investigative skills from other campuses.
In Malaysia, it's not puzzling that dysfunctional members of the system are appointed tocarry out "independent investigation" on the cult members' behaviors. It becomes a foregone presumption that the serendipity would be that victims were partakers of the fracas, for the fact that, they had the blood-type dracula needs to feed and quench his thirst; the dracularic instigators couldn't had done wrong if the thirst was inherent. In finality, the victim would have to be prosecuted and ordered to compensate dracula another 3 pints of blood. As a "token of goodwill gesture" the dysfunctioning system administrators were kind enough to let go the victim if they would be prepared to be taciturn.
Subject matter closed? It had just begun. It's getting insidious and obnoxious.
2 comments:
With those kind of ambiguity enquiry, I can even make a little bunny admit the crime assasinate the president.
If the authorities already have in mind what they want the ending of the so-called inquiry to be, then the conclusion is a foregone one. The inquiry is held to let everyone know that there is one and this is the only purpose served by the inquiry. Might as well be truthful and tell everyone, "Hey, we condone the fracas. That was what we wanted. UPM wants more pro-establishment thugs and all other students who don't think this way are not welcome here!" At least this way the authorities are honest!
Instead they choose to insult all of us with a "wayang" inquiry. Duh!
Post a Comment