The first obstacle of the legal process, at least, to overturn a university's barring of one of the 'ISA 7' students from resuming his education, has been scaled.

Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Wan Afrah Wan Ibrahim today gave leave for Helman Sanuddin, through his lawyer, to apply for a review of Universiti Teknologi Mara's (UiTM) termination of his studies.

Helman is one of seven university students charged in 2001 for allegedly participating in a demonstration against the Internal Security Act (ISA) in front of the National Mosque in Kuala Lumpur in June 8 of that year.

Dubbed the 'ISA 7', they were barred from continuing their education pending the outcome of their case or their apology.

Despite their subsequent acquittal last April, however, only Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) has reinstated former student Zulkefle Idris and allowed him to complete the last six months of his diploma in computer science course.

Automatic end

In a letter he received early last July, Helman was informed by his university that his studies had automatically ended as a result of his suspension under Act 174 of the Educational Institutions (Discipline) Act 1976.

Act 174 allows for disciplinary action to be taken against those charged in the court of law.

Furthermore, said UiTM deputy vice-chancellor Prof Dr Nasuddin Othman in the letter , as the university regards the four years since Helman's suspension in 2001 as a study term, his tenure has exceeded beyond the allowed period.

"In view of that, your application to be reinstated, that has been delayed for almost four years, is not approved."

In the application filed by his lawyer Edmund Bon, Helman is seeking the court's declaration of Section 14 (1) of Act 174, as well as Regulation 2.5.5.2 of the UiTM's Academic Regulations as unconstitutional and/or against the principle of natural justice and, therefore, null and void.

Compensation

"How can the study period of Helman have elapsed if, under suspension, he was not even studying?" said Edmund, referring to Regulation 2.5.5.2, when met outside the court.

Helman is also applying for the court to set aside his suspension under Section 14 (1), the decision stated in the UiTM letter, to order his reinstatement into UiTM and for the university to allow him to resume his studies.

Helman is also seeking the court to order UiTM to pay him compensation and eight percent annual interest, among other incurred costs.

Lawyers representing UiTM and the Attorney-General's Chambers did not voice any objections to the leave application, saying they would address the issues pertaining to constitutionality during the substantive hearing.

The substantive judicial review application will be served on the respondent next week, said Edmund.