Recently, news broke out about a Harvard University scholar’s sacking for research misconduct amounting to academic dishonesty. Francesca Gino, a professor, was also the fifth highest paid employee at Harvard, drawing a staggering US$1 million a year.Gino’s case became controversial not only because of her ridiculously high salary, but also because of the irony of the subject matter of her research.She crafted her scholarly research on behavioural science and organisational psychology, with a focus on judgement, negotiation, creativity, and ethics.The subject of ethics and academia, or rather good governance in higher education is a theme which needs special attention in the context of Malaysia, given the plethora of problems the higher education sector has faced for almost three decades now.Gino’s sacking is a proactive step towards good governance by Harvard University. In fact, several incidents of research fraud in universities over the years also reveal that research shortcuts and sloppy peer review processes are becoming normalised. Hence, there is a need for universities to address the immense pressure put on academics to “publish or perish”.Quantity over qualityA university’s reputation is increasingly based on quantity (e.g. number of citations, number of foreign students, number of PhDs who graduate on time, number of foreign academics in joint research projects, and number of international research links), rather than on quality.The rising incidence of article retractions by journals on account of research fraud in part indicates a rise in the number of academics who plagiarise or falsify data. When research data is plagiarised or unverified, this cuts short the writing process and increases the chances to publish more within a shorter period of time.A good governance structure in any university must fuel its drive towards relevant knowledge production. At the same time, university administrators must protect the dignity and mental health of academics. Apart from not over burdening them, their access to critical, exploratory thinking and research must be encouraged, not obstructed.Bad academic governance is manifested in book banning and frequent cancellation of public forums and debates. It is also regressive when “show cause” letters are issued by university management or lecturers reprimanded for giving public opinions, despite citing facts, on a controversial topic.Universities are meant to be “safe spaces” where ideas are challenged, and alternative angles are presented and debated. Discussions must be taken in exactly that spirit, an exercise in friendly, intellectual verbal exchange, without any concrete solution in sight. In fact, the act of debate or being exposed to different perspectives is the end in itself.Towards good governanceThe following are three important manifestations of good governance.1. Uphold legislation that promotes rather than suppresses university autonomy and academic freedom.In Malaysia, legislation is embodied in the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA), a set of laws applied to public universities. They legislate for the governance “structure” of public universities, which is embodied in the board of directors or governors.The UUCA regulates all academic staff and student activities on campus. Since the UUCA has jurisdiction over the governance of public universities, it means public universities do not have the autonomy to appoint their vice-chancellors and university board members. Section 4A of the UUCA says:“For the purpose of selecting a qualified and suitable person for the post of vice-chancellor under UUCA or for any other post to which a minister has the power to appoint under this Act, the Minister shall, from time to time, appoint a committee to advise him on such appointments.”Political influenceThis is why university governance is often influenced by politics, despite there being several stages in the selection process. The committee appointed by the minister offers “advice” in matters of who is appointed the vice-chancellor. However, the entire selection process is vague as its terms of references are generally unclear.Furthermore, the UUCA does not recognise public universities as autonomous bodies but instead declares them statutory bodies. Therefore, the role of the minister in the VC selection committee is seldom questioned by top university administration.A very important aspect of the UUCA which many Malaysians may not know is that it incorporates the National Council on Higher Education Act, under which the higher education minister is bound to comply with a very important provision, mainly that the council has the powers to determine what the minister’s jurisdictions are. The minister is also the chairman of the council, but since 2013, it has yet to convene.Exchange of ideas2. Enable spaces for critical engagement on campus.Critical debates and intellectual discourses on campus corridors are the very foundation of all good universities. Such activities are educational because they help students develop confidence, to articulate a viewpoint with clarity, while at the same time standing firm on views no matter how much opposition they may encounter.Public forums which engage a wide range of stakeholders such as in civil society and the corporate sector, as well as on-campus speakers corners also train lecturers and students to perceive phenomena from multiple perspectives, a skill that will have far reaching value in one’s career and in a graduate’s life.A university administration that encourages a culture of debating “what if”, “why”, and “how” topics, is an administration which upholds good governance.Reluctant to reform3. Restructure the administrative “mindset” of our universities.Malaysian public universities operate within a culture of hierarchy and political subordination. University administrative structures and bureaucracy perpetuate a culture whereby many among the academic staff and university administration are reluctant to reform outdated procedures. Many of these administrative procedures are suggested by the ministry or the minister, reinforcing the feeling of political subordination among academics.This has impacted how academicians work, mainly their sense of urgency, decisions about their research agendas, what they choose to publish (and how often), and whether they feel the need to make their publications accessible to the general public.To conclude, bad governance in Malaysia’s public higher education sector is linked to the UUCA. As long as the National Council for Higher Education Act remains buried, political subordination, mediocrity, and the lack of transparency in top university appointments will continue to set Malaysia back.Bad examples in USLastly, this opinion piece would not be complete without mention of similar developments in bad governance, within US academia. The crackdown on campuses such as Columbia, Yale and Harvard universities demonstrates deteriorating governance, and is an affront to university autonomy and academic freedom of expression.It also shows how US universities are openly being “held hostage” to corporate interests which are tied to the country’s defence industry.In the case of Columbia University, its board of directors prevented the publication of an academic article in the Columbia Law Review. The article, written by a Palestinian human rights lawyer, accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza and upholding an apartheid regime.The board’s intervention was an unprecedented breach of the editorial independence of the journal, which is run by Columbia’s Law School students. This demonstrates that the US Department of Defence allegedly sets the terms of university research landscapes.It is indeed a disturbing trend when any military establishment has such influences over university research and higher education funding. Civilisation progresses when the pursuit of knowledge benefits all aspects of humanity, and not only its “securitised and corporatised” agendas. The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.