Reiterating my support for Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara

Frankly, I'm been amazed and surprised by the number of negative comments generated by my previous post on the current situation facing Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara. This prompted me to do a more thorough investigation into the history and chronology of the firing of Dr. Azly and his wife from UUM. My investigations, coupled with my personal experience of pursuing a PhD here in the US, have led me to reiterate my support for Dr. Azly and his wife, in stronger terms than before. In addition, I also want to try to respond to some of the queries raised by certain comments to my previous post on this matter. Be warned, this is going to be a long post.

According to an exclusive by Malaysiakini dated Aug 22, 2005, it was in March of 2004 when UUM initiated 'proceedings' against Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara.

In a letter dated March 17, 2004 from the disciplinary committee stating that the pair had broken the code of conduct, they were also accused of failure to report for work on completion of their doctoral studies in the United States.

Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara started their doctorate program in 1997 (I'm guessing the fall of 1997 when most US universities start their academic term).

The same Malaysiakini report stated that:

They had gone to the US in 1997 and had then written to UUM on Sept 5, 2004 to ask for no-pay leave extension up to September next year (which means Sept 2006, I think), citing a need to stabilise their personal financial situation as the reason for wanting to prolong their stay.


So, the period of time from Sept 1997 to Sept 2004 is roughly 7 years, and including the 2 years that Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara was asking for, means that it would be roughly 9 years before they would return to serve UUM. During this time, according to a lawsuit recently filed by UUM Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara were paid their salaries as well as monthly expenses totaling RM1.25 million.

Some of our readers have commented on why it cost UUM RM1.25 million to fund Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara. For those who are unfamiliar with the US education system, it costs roughly 50,000 US dollars a year to fund a PhD student. My costs are being borne by the department of political science at Duke University. I've said in a previous post that it would eventually cost roughly RM900,000 to fund me for the 5 years of my PhD program (God willing I'm be able to finish in another 2 years). If it was the three years of sponsorship that UUM gave to Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara, it would cost roughly RM600,000 each (depending on the exchange rate and cost of living, which is higher in NY than in North Carolina) which would work out to the RM1.2 million or so cited by UUM.

I'm not sure if the school fees of Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara were waived by Columbia (which is roughly 30,000 US per year) but regardless, the RM600,000 or so spent by UUM on Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara respectively is not extravagant and in fact, well within bounds of two graduate students living in NY for three years. In fact, RM600,000 is roughly what JPA will spend to support one student for 4 years here in the US or the roughly RM500,000 JPA will spend to support a student for 3 years in the UK. I don't need to remind many of our readers that many of these JPA scholars fail to return to Malaysia to 'serve' out their bond or that even if they return to Malaysia, many of them end up working in the private sector. This is not to say that I support anyone including Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara to break their bonds which have been paid by taxpayers money (although the circumstances facing Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara were different, more on this later) but that our readers who are critical of the amount spent on Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara should be equally critical of JPA sending undergraduates to study in the US or the UK!

OK, back to the question of salaries and expenses. What is unclear to me was whether UUM continued to pay cost of living expenses and the salaries of Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara during the period in which they requested for the 4 extensions asked for.

Again, according to Malaysiakini,

It said the couple had also asked for extensions on four occasions to complete their studies, and this was granted with their monthly salaries paid and their expenses financed by the university despite being absent from duty.

This seems to imply that they were paid their living expenses and their salaries while they were on each of their 4 extensions. But was this sufficient for living and supporting a family in NY?

For those of you who have not had the experience of relocating to another country with your entire family without the support of a corporation (like the many MNCs which help transfer their staff from one country to another), it is a very traumatizing process. Fitting into a new culture, finding schools for your kids, transitioning to a new and demanding academic environment.

My wife and I found it hard enough to transition to life in Durham, North Carolina, and we were relatively 'lucky' in the sense that we don't have any kids, we were able to purchase a car relatively quickly, I was being funded by two scholarships (Duke and Fulbright), she managed to find a job relatively quickly (she's an architect by training) and the cost of living in Durham is much lower than that of major cities in the US, not least NY.

Most sponsored PhD students from Malaysia choose to go to 'easier' places such as the UK and Australia where (i) there is already a large support group of Malaysians there who can help a family settle in relatively quickly (ii) which is closer to home (Sydney is 8 hours from KL, London is 13, compared to the 20 plus hours of traveling time to NY and add another 10 or so hours if you have to transit another time within the US) (iii) there are few pre-PhD dissertation requirements.

Point (iii) deserves further elaboration. Unlike most PhD programs in the UK and in Australia, most, if not all, PhD programs in the US require a student to take between 2 to 3 years of coursework before they are even allowed to start working on their PhD dissertation. That is why it takes much longer for a US Phd student, especially those in the humanities and the social sciences, to finish their Phd. The average time for my course is 6 years. For those in the religion department, which have much tougher language requirements, it usually takes an average of 7 plus years to finish a PhD.

While Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara might have taken a bit longer (I think it took them a total of 9 years to finish their doctorate dissertations), this has to be seen in the context of their personal hardships which included the Asian financial crisis in 1997 / 1998 which probably cut their living expenses (including their ringgit denominated savings and salaries, which probably was used as part of their relocation costs) significantly and the 9/11 attacks on the US and NY specifically, which might have pushed their dissertation work back as much as a year. Both of them, for legitimate reasons, have wanted to keep the personal side of their circumstances private since they don't think that that was what led to their subsequent firing but in the end they decided to reveal some of these circumstances in a public letter which was published in Malaysiakini on Aug 9, 2007.

Would it have been easier if they had decided to do their doctorates locally in Malaysia or in the UK or Australia? Of course it would have. But getting into Columbia is no easy feat and it presented them with a once in a lifetime opportunity to study and work in one of the best universities in the US, if not the world.

For those of our readers who wondered why these scholars had to travel all the way to the US to write about Cyberjaya or the MSRMs, I would say this in reply. Being in an academic environment such as one in Columbia allows you to learn different theoretical approaches to one's subject of interest which one can then apply in the study of that subject. In addition, one can also learn about comparative examples (from other countries) in one's subject of interest. I don't exactly know what Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara wrote their respective dissertations on or if they brought in many comparative examples from other countries but I can illustrate this point using my own personal situation.

In the course of my studies here in the US, I've learned a semi-sophisticated statistical technique which can help one estimate racial voting patterns in ethnically divided societies. Using this method, I've been able to estimate ethnic voting patterns in Peninsular Malaysia from the 1959 to the 2004 elections. Using data which my research collaborate, Dr. Bridget Welsh, from SAIS in Johns Hopkins, at the polling station level for the 1999 and 2004 elections, we have managed to estimate racial voting patterns at the polling station level. Would I have been able to learn and apply this if I did my PhD in Malaysia? Probably not! So while I might be writing about elections in Malaysia, I'm using relatively sophisticated tools and theories which I've learn throughout the course of my studies here in the US. I'm willing to bet that Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara have benefited similarly from their US experience.

For those readers who are wondering why Dr. Azly had to take so long to finish his dissertation and why he couldn't just 'transfer' credits from his previous Masters degrees, this is what I have to say in response. Most US PhD programs actively discourage the 'transfer' of credits, if you will. There are a few reasons why this is so. Most schools want you to fulfill a number of credits in terms of courses because they want you to be familiar with the theoretical approach which a particular department or faculty member takes in regards to the subject of interest. In addition, this is a good way for a doctorate student to get to know faculty better so that one can better pick and choose faculty to be on one's committee. So even if you could transfer credits, you might not want to because you want to take certain courses under certain professors.

To illustrate how difficult it is for one to 'transfer' credits from one program to another here in the US, let me give you a few more personal examples. I have an MPhil in economics from the University of Cambridge. I toyed with the idea of applying to do a PhD in Economics in the US after my Masters in Cambridge and I found out that I couldn't 'exempt' myself from the coursework components for all of the top schools in the US. A friend of mine who recently transfered from Duke to Berkeley also faced a similar quandary if you will. She did two years of coursework here at Duke, including a Masters dissertation, but she has to repeat another two years of coursework at Berkeley even though she will be in the same field i.e. political science. Hence, the notion that Dr. Azly could have 'transfered' credits from his previous Masters programs is not a very realistic one.

I also have to mention that one needs to take a 'qualifying' or 'comprehensive' exam at the end of the coursework period and one needs to pass this exam before even starting one's own dissertation.

They could have given up even before they started on their quest for their respective doctorates because of the Asian financial crisis. They could have given up halfway through their program especially after the 9-11 attacks on New York. Believe me when I say that if you take a straw poll among many sponsored academics in the public universities, you'd find a significant number who only returned with a Masters degree after 4 or 5 years abroad or that they had to come back and finish their PhDs locally. Kudos should be given to Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara for 'braving' it out in NY and finally finishing their respective doctorates despite their difficult circumstances. Instead, many of our readers have chosen to disparage them, perhaps out of a lack of knowledge of their personal circumstances as well as the a lack of knowledge in regards to the US doctorate process. (I hope that none of the critical comments were 'planted' by members of certain political parties as a way to 'sabotage' this blog)

Back to the chronology of events. After asking for a no-pay leave extension for 2 years starting from September 2004, the disciplinary committee made a decision on December 7, 2004 that the two were 'found guilty' and that they would be fired with effect from Dec 9, 2004. The grounds of the firing were twofold - firstly, because they had not reported back to work at UUM after the completion of their doctorates (it is unclear to me if both of them had finished their doctorates in 2004) and also because of their refusal to sign the 'Akujanji' pledge.

They were sent a letter , dated Dec 23, by the disciplinary committee which 'also gave them 30 days of receipt in which to lodge an appeal, which they did on Jan 1, 2005'.

Now, I've been told by some of my lecturer friends in the public universities, that it is very difficult to fire a civil servant, especially lecturers in public universities. It takes a series of steps culminating with some sort of signed document on the part of the minister in charge (in this case, it would be the Minister of Higher Education, previously it would be the Minister of Education). This kind of move is highly unprecedented, especially given that Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara were sponsored students and a significant amount of resources had already been spent on their obtaining their respective doctorates. In fact, Dr. Azly speculated that they were probably the first two academics to be fired because of their refusal to sign the Akujanji. This leads me to believe that their firings were more about their refusal to sign the Akujanji rather than their requests for a further no-pay leave extension until 2006. To have the approval of the Minister for the firing of two highly qualified academic staff is no small matter.

It also had to go through the then VC of UUM, Dr Ahmad Fawzi Basri (now deceased), which from his writings, I gather that Dr. Azly was not on good terms with. In a letter dated June 13, 2007, he listed some of these issues including his reputation as a dictatorial VC and as someone who regularly suppressed freedom of speech among students and who seemed to specifically target Dr. Azly. Of course, Dr. Basri cannot defend himself now that he has passed away but clearly Dr. Azly saw the potential that Akujanji could be used against him by the then VC if he signed it and later returned to UUM. (For those interested, you can read a report on Malaysia Today on allegations of corruption brought up against the same VC)

The fact that their respective terminations had to go through a vindictive VC is only further proof to me that they were targeted more for their views and their seeming 'disobedience' against the administration of UUM than for their request for a no pay leave of 2 years.

One should look at the case of Terence Gomez, who at one point in time, was 'forced' to resign by the UM, under an unpopular VC, when he was appointed to a position as a research coordinator at UNRISD in Geneva, Switzerland. He was later reinstated at the intervention of Pak Lah. Or one can look at the case of Prof Ramasamy of UKM whose contract was not renewed probably because of his outspoken views against the Malaysian government.

At this point in time, I should remind our readers that Akujanji was only introduced after Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara had left for the US. It was not part of their 'contract' agreement with UUM when they left for the US as sponsored students.

Why not just sign the Akujanji and be done with it, some of our readers might ask? I firmly believe that Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara did not sign the Akujanji as a matter of principle and not because it was an easy 'cop-out'. Here are some of the reasons behind my thinking.

If Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara had wanted to stay on in the US and earn the 'big bucks', as some of our readers have speculated, then, the easy way would have been to sign the Akujanji in hope of getting the 2 year no pay extension. Even if they had wanted to stay on in the US indefinitely, it would have been easier to 'dupe' the UUM authorities by showing a certain amount of pliancy and sign the Akujanji and then after the 2 years of no-pay leave, ask for another extension or just not come back at all and ignore UUM totally!

By refusing to sign the Akujanji and by asking for continual clarification in regards to two clauses within the Akujanji which can potentially be abused, they took the risk of getting their request for a no-pay leave extension rejected.

I certainly don't think that Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara wanted to be fired from UUM so that they could be freed from their bonds. By being fired, they risked losing their pensions which they could have built up by continuing to work in UUM after finishing their doctorates. They also risked not being able to be employed by any other public university in Malaysia (all of whom have Akujanji pledges) because they would probably be 'blacklisted' by the MOHE as well as the public universities. They would also know that by being fired, they risked UUM going after them for the amount of living expenses and salaries paid to them while they were studying in the US (which is what is happening now) and that UUM could go after their guarantors if both of them remained in the US (which is what is happening now as well).

No, by not wanting to sign the Akujanji pledge, Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara were taking a high road and standing by their principles and they are paying dearly for it now, having been fired from UUM (and probably losing the pensions which they have built up there from working before going off to the US) and probably not able to seek employment elsewhere in the public university system and on top of that, being sued by UUM for RM1.25 million.

How would our readers feel if the government decided to target a few JPA scholars who have come back to Malaysia but not served out their bond and instead went to work for opposition parties and sued these individuals while letting those scholars who are working for MNCs get off 'scott-free'? Wouldn't you be criticizing this policy instead of asking only for these few JPA scholars who are targeted to quit opposition politics? (And Dr. Azly's 'crime' is much less 'serious'. He didn't join the opposition, he only voiced out his opposition against Akujanji)

As for the question of them taking the 2 year no pay leave to 'stabilize their financial situation', could we really blame them for doing so, especially if they had run up substantial debts for the medical bills of both Dr. Mutiara and at least one of their children? Taking this no pay leave and working for a US based institution for 2 years doesn't 'cost' UUM anything and in fact, they could potentially benefit from Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara's experience from teaching / working in these US based institutions. If they decided that at the end of 2 years that they didn't want to come back to UUM, they could still be asked to pay back UUM the amount they owe plus interest over the 2 years.

I firmly believe that if UUM had allowed Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara to have that 2 year no pay leave and allowed them NOT to sign the Akujanji as a way of compromise, I think both of them would be teaching in UUM right now. Earning the so-called 'big bucks' in the US would still take Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara a long time to pay off the 300,000 to 400,000 US dollars (depending on the exchange rate) owed to UUM. Perhaps it will take less than the 5 lifetimes that Dr. Azly mentioned but it certainly wouldn't be paid off in a few years, especially with bills to pay and with children to support in the US.

I firmly believe that Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara were and still are committed to improving the state of our public universities in their own respective areas. Just read this excerpt taken from a letter written to Malaysiakini by one of Dr. Azyl's former students, who did not agree with Dr. Azly's decision to remain in the US:

I studied under Azly way before he went to US for his doctorate. Even then, he was, to me, an outstanding educationist. His approach towards learning was different from other teachers, not that I am implying that the others are bad. Azly’s approach is different. He taught us, among others, how to think critically and how to approach a problem and find the best solution. His style of lecturing kept us awake, with him inserting current issues with facts learned, making us voice out our opinions and creating many discussions one after another.

I can remember many of us coming out glimmering from his class, eager to share the knowledge gained with others who were not so fortunate to be taught by him.

Being a true visionist, Azly had so many ideas on how the education system could be improved. Even with all the bureaucracy in MRSM, he and his wife did all they could to make education fun while at the same time making learning as effective as possible. I remember one time when we were a part of an English club which hosted a Drama Night with dancing, singing and a live band performance - something that was truly unheard of in the MRSM learning system.

After that, some of my friends who were originally quite shy, including myself, were more vocal in class and not afraid to give our ideas which completely reversed our personality. Sorry Academy Fantasia, we were performing way before you (only not on a national level).

As a true educationist and after gaining so much experience abroad, I am sure that both Azly and Marina are eager to part with their knowledge only be bogged down with bureaucracy that will only degrade what they have learned. As an ex-student of Azly, I can vouch that he does care for his students. Many, however, may feel threatened by him because of his approach and how much students responded to his way of learning.

Yes, I agree with Ariff that Azly and Marina should come back and just sign that ‘Aku Janji’ pledge and prove themselves to this country and how classroom teaching should be. But then again, as an educationist with a vision that is beyond the standards that are here, I wouldn’t blame him if he wanted to stay in the US where he would be truly appreciated and given the opportunity to expand his talent.

As Malaysia heads for 2020, ‘Aku Janji’ and the University and University Colleges Act should be scrapped, giving freedom to both educators and students to express themselves without fear and prejudice, creating the right kind of mentality to appreciate Vision 2020.

Lastly, for those who want to cast aspersion on Dr. Azly's Doctorate in Education (EdD) instead of a PhD in Education, I'll just point to this Columbia link which says that an EdD requires more credits compared to a PhD (90 versus 75) and that an EdD usually takes longer to complete compared to a PhD. As far the difference between the two, I'd just say, based on my limited knowledge that the EdD focuses more on the 'practice' while the PhD may focus more on the 'theoretical' aspects of education. (Perhaps similar to the different between a DBA - application of theory - and a PhD in Business Administration) Please remember that this is Columbia University, a distinguished and reputable university, unlike some of the more dubious ones which we've highlighted in this blog in the past.

I think I've gone on long enough.

I'd like to recap the main points made in this long post:

1) That the RM600,000 or so spent on Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara respectively is not an extravagant sum and is roughly what the JPA spends on a single Malaysian student studying in a private college here in the US, many of whom don't return to serve out their bonds

2) That the US Phd process usually takes longer than the UK or the Australian PhD process because of heavy coursework requirements as well as the need to take a 'comprehensive' or 'qualifying' exam.

3) That it would have been easier for Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara to sign the Akujanji pledge to obtain their no pay leave extension

4) That it doesn't make financial sense for Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara to renege on their bond to UUM so that they can work in the US

5) That they took a principled stand against Akujanji and paid the price for it

6) That they were targeted by the former VC and perhaps the former Minister of Higher Education because of their stand against Akujanji rather than because of their request for a 2 year no pay leave

7) That they went through many trying personal hardships including the 1997 / 1998 Asian financial crisis, the 9-11 attacks on New York and the many illnesses and deaths in the family and still managed to finish their respective doctorates

8) That they were and still are committed to returning to Malaysia to teach and contribute to building up the capacity of our local public universities

I hope that I've answered many of the criticisms targeted at Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara in this post.

And I sincerely hope and pray that with a different VC at UUM and with a different Minister of Higher Education, the situation facing Dr. Azly and Dr. Mutiara can be resolved in the near future (perhaps with the intervention of Pak Lah?) so that these two scholars can return to Malaysia and contribute their expertise, their passion for teaching and their knowledge to building up our public universities.

Thanks for your patience in reading through this long post and apologies for any grammatical and spelling errors (of which I'm sure there are many).