Chapter 2 - Report of the Complaints, Monitoring and Inquiries Group While the Commission understands that installation of the CCTVs was aimed at addressing the problem of vandalism by students, it is of the view that any disciplinary and monitoring measures taken by the school authorities should be carried out based on the best interests of the children and in a manner consistent with their human dignity as enshrined under Articles 3 and 28(2) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Due consideration should also be given to Article 16 of the CRC which accords a child the right to be protected against any unlawful or arbitrary violation of privacy. Complaints were also received about disciplinary teachers who failed to observe rules and regulations when punishing students. The Commission is of the opinion that the school should have considered other appropriate strategies in dealing with disciplinary problems or behavioural difficulties among students, with the ultimate aim of nurturing and instilling in them the values and responsibilities of good citizenry without undermining their basic rights. (i) Campus Election The Commission received memoranda from three student groups who alleged fraud and interference by the administration of their respective universities during the campus election. A group from the University of Malaya expressed dissatisfaction because the campus administration had failed to fix a date for the election, even though the one-year term of the office bearers had expired. The students claimed to have submitted several recommendations to improve the process of the campus election but said there had been no feedback. They proposed that the Student Affairs Department should no longer manage the campus election. They also wanted the zoning system to be abolished; the election date to be fixed; freedom to campaign; improvements to the voting system; and monitoring of the election. Students from the University of Malaysia Sabah claimed that the campus election had been manipulated. They said the e-voting system used was not accredited based on any international standards and that there were many problems, thus denying them a fair election. Furthermore, problems had arisen in accessing the voting account; technical problems were encountered on the computer; and there was a discrepancy in the total number of votes. They urged the Commission to monitor the campus election. Student representatives from the International Islamic University of Malaysia alleged violations in the election of officer bearers of the Students Council. They claimed that there was interference by the Student Affairs Department, in contravention of the University’s constitution. 3. PERIODIC VISITS TO PLACES OF DETENTION Visits to detention centres are among the Commission’s responsibilities under the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999. During the year, the Commission carried out a total of 30 visits to detention centres (Table 3). 49