.png)
THE repeal of the Universities and University Colleges Act (AUKU) 1971 is not merely a decision to abolish a law that has long been seen as a symbol of control over students. Instead, it opens a new chapter in determining how far the country’s higher education institutions can truly enjoy autonomy and academic freedom.
In his announcement, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said the government would repeal the Act to give student movements greater democratic space, after previous amendments failed to fully address their demands.
However, the bigger question is what happens next, including the legal framework that will replace AUKU and whether it can genuinely transform the culture and management structures of universities.
This is because AUKU is not solely a law governing student activities. It has also served as one of the foundations for the establishment, administration and governance of higher education institutions.
Its repeal therefore requires a replacement that not only safeguards students’ freedoms, but also provides a clear structure to ensure universities remain functional, accountable and well governed.
In this context, the Higher Education Ministry’s move to outline a new legal framework through the One Higher Education Act agenda under the Malaysia Higher Education Plan (RPTM) 2026-2035 signals that the repeal of AUKU should not take place in a legal vacuum.
Most importantly, the new law must not merely change the name of the Act or transfer existing restrictions into new provisions. If that happens, repealing AUKU would amount to little more than a cosmetic change.
The reform must address more fundamental issues, including university autonomy, academic freedom, students’ rights to organise and express themselves, the powers of university administrations and checks and balances.
These concerns have already been raised by student movements, which have welcomed the government’s announcement while calling for a clear implementation timeline.
They have also called for students, academics and university communities to be openly involved in drafting the new law. Freedom without accountability could create new problems, while accountability without autonomy risks bringing back the culture of control that the government seeks to leave behind.
Therefore, the success of the AUKU repeal should not be measured simply by the date the Act is abolished, but by the changes that follow.
The government’s real challenge now is to prove that the promised freedoms can be translated into institutional autonomy, a mature academic culture and students who are confident enough to speak up without turning universities into political battlegrounds that lose sight of their primary role as centres of knowledge.
