Draft of Higher Education Law (RUUPT) was assessed flawed academically, ideologically and failed to support the interests of the nation. In fact, the RUUPT draft was assessed to contain many problems.
The aforementioned is the discourse result of the UGM Pancasila Study Center on the Draft that will be certified in March 2012. Researcher of the Center and member of the RUUPT study team, Hastangka, explained there are a number of articles in the Draft that do not show the correct way of logical thinking. That would invite questions from academics and intellectuals, as contained in article 1, paragraph (1) which states cluster of science is a collection of some branches of science that are developed scientifically and arranged systematically. Such understanding does not seem to have a clear scientific basis and seem to be rushed out to formulate the definition of science cluster.
It would certainly affect Paragraph (2) which called science cluster as prescribed in paragraph (1) consists of: a) the science of religion; b) The sciences of humanities; c) The social sciences; d) the natural sciences; e ) formal sciences, and f) applied sciences. "What logical thinking that builds the sudden appearance of formal sciences in Point e, what is meant by formal science? This category is clearly not logical and not systematic as referred to in Paragraph 1 which requires a systematic way," said Hastangka at UGM, Thursday (15/3).
Hastangka also asked why all of a sudden there is the concept of formal science, while in the following points there is no explanation of informal science? This paragraph will certainly embarrass the academic world if it is not revised soon.
Other articles are similarly have academic and ideological defects, such as vocational education is equated with the Bachelor degree and vocational education can be developed equal to the master and applied doctoral programs. "Of course, if the Draft Law is forced to be approved, education in this country would certainly go chaotic," said Hastangka.
Another researcher, Diasma, has the same view. He considered RUUPT still has the impression of being rushed out to pursue a target by not considering the impact that may arise. RUUPT was judged as not yet accommodate the interests of the nation. "RUUPT seems to be rushed out, because actually it is potential to create some problems," he explained.
Article 70 Paragraph (3) which reads Private Higher Education is founded by community by setting up organizers in the form of non-profit legal organization is assessed to create potential clash between the Foundation that originally manages the Private Higher Education and those that will make a new legal entity. Then, Article 106 paragraph (4) which reads the costs borne by the entire student is at most one third of the cost of college operations. "This clearly shows the transfer of responsibility of the state in the education of the nation. While in fact education is the responsibility of the state, thus no budget transfer to the public or the students," he said.
Diasma observed that the Draft Law has too much regulation through ministerial regulation. While in the legal system of Indonesia, the order of the legislation cannot go directly through ministerial regulation. The procedure of the Law is Government Regulation (PP) and ministerial regulation. "Therefore, the RUUPT is more suitable to be called Government Regulation (PP) than a law," explained Diasma.