New Malaysia PM sworn in amid crisis, Mahathir fights on
Kuala Lumpur: A former interior minister was sworn in as Malaysia's premier on Sunday, marking the return of a scandal-mired regime to power after the last government's collapse but ex-leader Mahathir Mohamad slammed the move as illegal.
The Southeast Asian nation was plunged into turmoil a week ago as Mahathir's reformist "Pact of Hope" alliance, which stormed to a historic victory in 2018, collapsed after a bid to force out leader-in-waiting Anwar Ibrahim.
Mahathir - who was the world's oldest leader at 94 - then quit, triggering a race for the premiership which he ultimately lost to little-known Muhyiddin Yassin, who heads a coalition dominated by the country's ethnic Malay Muslim majority.
The decision on Saturday by the monarch to pick Muhyiddin was greeted with shock as Mahathir's allies claimed he had enough support to return as leader, and sparked widespread anger that the democratically elected government was being abruptly ejected.
The king appoints the country's prime minister, who must show he has the support of most MPs.
Muhyiddin's coalition includes the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the party of disgraced ex-leader Najib Razak, as well as a hardline group that wants tougher Islamic laws.
UMNO is the corruption-riddled lynchpin of the coalition thrown out at the 2018 elections amid allegations Najib and his cronies looted billions of dollars from state fund 1MDB. Najib is now on trial for corruption.
Despite a last-minute bid by Mahathir and his allies to prove that the veteran politician had enough support to return as premier, Muhyiddin's inauguration went ahead on Sunday morning.
Wearing traditional Malay dress, the 72-year-old took the oath of office at the national palace in Kuala Lumpur during an elaborate ceremony. But in a press conference shortly beforehand, Mahathir insisted that Muhyiddin did not have the support of most of the country's 222 MPs.
"This is a very strange thing... losers will form the government, the winners will be in the opposition," he said.
"The rule of law no longer applies," he said, adding he would call for an urgent parliament sitting so that Muhyiddin can prove he has enough support.
The veteran ex-leader -- who served a first stint as premier from 1981 to 2003 -- however conceded that the king had refused to see him to hear his case, and that the "Pact of Hope" alliance would now go into opposition.
Public anger was growing at the ejection of the reformist alliance, with the hashtag "NotMyPM" trending on Twitter and more than 100,000 people signing a petition that said the move was a "betrayal" of voters' choice at the 2018 poll.
The political crisis began when a group of ruling coalition lawmakers joined forces with opposition parties in a bid to form a new government without Anwar and stop him becoming premier.
After the government fell, Mahathir was appointed interim premier and he and Anwar initially launched separate bids for power, reviving their decades-old rivalry.
But as Muhyiddin's bid quickly gained support and it became clear that he could get into power with UMNO, Mahathir and Anwar joined forces again in an effort to stop him -- but it proved too little, too late.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
