THE Universiti Putra Malaysia Alumni Association (UPMAA) has demanded that the Education Ministry explain the move to “prematurely” end varsity board chairman Syed Razlan Syed Putra Jalalullail’s tenure.
“We want his sacking to be retracted, and any new appointment delayed until the investigations are over,” UPMAA president Raihan Sharif said at the group’s office in Serdang.
“This is to ensure transparency in the matter.
“We’ve also sent letters to Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Education Minister Dr Maszlee Malik, seeking an explanation.”
Questions have been raised following Syed Razlan’s sacking just as he was investigating allegations of misconduct among UPM’s top management.
His termination letter, dated July 17, was signed by Maszlee. No reason was given for cutting his tenure short, and he got a month’s notice to vacate the post.
Syed Razlan was appointed board chairman last October for a three-year period.
He will be replaced by former Universiti Malaya vice-chancellor Ghauth Jasmon, effective August 19.
Prior to the termination, said Raihan, the ministry had asked Syed Razlan to investigate three senior UPM officers.
“Why was he sacked before he could complete the investigations?”
He added that the board of directors of a UPM subsidiary had asked for a forensic audit, which is now being conducted.
“The board found there to be poor governance and mismanagement, and called for an independent audit. We expect the audit to be completed in two weeks.”
He said the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission carried out a surprise raid on the subsidiary and took important documents.
“The audit and the MACC investigations must conclude before the ministry makes a decision on the appointment (of the UPM board chairman).”
Raihan said the move to end Syed Razlan’s tenure without any clear reason given is an insult as the latter held the highest post in the varsity.
“The termination was done without due process. If he had committed a crime, we would have no issues (with his sacking).
He added that UPMAA would not be opposed to the minister’s decision if the sacking had been done in the proper way.
“We believe that justice was not served here.” – August 7, 2019.
Comments
Posted 6 years ago by James Wong · Reply
Posted 6 years ago by T E · Reply