Dear Fellow Alumni
First of all, I thank the AITAA for providing this platform for alumni to
share their opinions on matters related to our alma mater. I refer to the
mail list <all@pub.aitaa.asia> from which we all have received many mails
recently. I believe this type of open communication is healthy and necessary
for AIT to move forward. Only through open dialogue with AIT stakeholders
will faith be restored to alumni.
Since 2011's flood, I have limited my sending of mass emails because of the
many complaints commenting on "email overload". Reading emails posted to
this list, I think there are some topics on which I can provide additional
information and clarification.
1. On 22 January 2013, AIT Board of Trustees has resolved to set up a
Fact Finding Committee in response to the complaints by AITAA-Thailand
regarding the governance and transparency of the administration of the AIT,
and the conclusion of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between AIT and
Laureate Education Asia Limited, which could affect the nature of AIT as a
non-profit organization, as stipulated in the AIT Charter.
In the same meeting, the Board was of the view that, quote, the President
should be requested to take a leave of absence from the Office of the
President during the period of fact finding to ensure that the fact finding
committee can work independently and transparently, unquote.
2. On 12 February 2013, AIT Board of Trustees appointed me as the
"Acting President" until the other Vice President returns from leave.
As I have communicated earlier, this appointment was in a way compulsory
based on AIT's bye-laws (clause 7.11). President Said Irandoust shall return
to his office if the Fact Finding Committee finds that he has properly
operated and managed AIT.
3. I am not a party to the dispute that caused President Said
Irandoust to take the administrative leave. If I were a party to the
dispute, the Board should have requested me to take leave as well.
Moreover, the Board would have avoided appointing me as Acting President.
4. On 1 July 2013 at the end of the current President's term, AIT
will have a new President. Very soon, the Board shall assemble an
international Presidential Search Committee (PSC) to perform the search
process. Traditionally, the PSC will solicit candidates on a global basis,
and the PSC will evaluate the candidates based on their records.
5. I never have any personal problem with President Said Irandoust,
except that we have had differences in our opinions regarding three
important issues that can affect the future of AIT: (a) AIT opening an
undergraduate program; (b) AIT entering into a strategic partnership with
the Laureate Group; and (c) the premature operation of AIT under the New
Charter. I have conveyed my honest and frank opinions to President Irandoust
both verbally and by our email communications. Some understanding of our
disagreement on the issues, and the depth of the discussion, may be gained
by reviewing samples of those communications at
www.facebook.com/aitforever.
6. In my interview with Radio Thailand, I simply told the audience
about known facts, without passing any judgment on the two main issues
concerning the fact finding exercise. The interviewer would like to know the
impacts caused by the 10 months legal dead lock, so I simply gave my account
of facts. The allegation that the interview script was prepared by the Thai
Government is totally childish. Thai Government already has too many issues
of national interest to tackle.
7. For the fear that AIT will become Thai Institute, I can assure you
this will not happen. Although being the largest donor to AIT, Thailand has
always recognized AIT as an autonomous international institute.
What would benefit Thailand if AIT becomes a Thai university? In fact
Thailand wants to see AIT playing bigger international roles, with the
emergence of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) in 2015.
8. Just a week before the Board Meeting on 12 February 2013,
President Irandoust tried to ask me to voluntarily leave my post as VP by
offering me any other portfolio I like. When I refused, he sent out 10-page
charge distributed to all members of the Board. Not to be trapped in his
favorite war-of-words game, I would rather keep quiet and wait to present my
case to the Fact-Finding Committee.
9. I take this opportunity to comment on one particular case as it
involves both the reputation of AIT and myself. It is about the
Friends-of-AIT (FoAIT) Foundation. The Foundation was launched on AIT Day
2010 in front of HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, who had earlier
donated one million Baht as seed funding. The follow-up fundraising campaign
has raised an additional 17 million Baht. The process to register FoAIT as a
charitable foundation was handled by AIT's engaged law firm with the full
knowledge of President Irandoust, and at least two forms of the registration
documents bear his own signature. After the registration was complete, a
bank account of FoAIT was to be opened by transferring one million baht from
AIT's financial system, where the 18 million baht is "parked". President
Irandoust refused to approve the transfer of monies for the reason that "I
[President Irandoust] have changed my mind". Then on 12 February 2013, he
declared that FoAIT is a private entity of which I am an owner. This
sequence of events illustrates why many universities separate their
foundation for fundraising from internal university operations. That is, to
ensure that the wishes of the donors are respected, that the money remains
independent of university administrators and financial systems, and that an
accounting of any single donor's money can be made at any time. Notable
universities with such independent foundations include Colorado State
University, University of California Berkeley, and the Georgia Institute of
Technology (Georgia Tech).
On this serious issue that affects the trust of donors to AIT, I am now
compiling all documents related to the case for distribution to stakeholders
(especially individual donors), the Board of Trustees and the Fact-finding
Committee.
As in any healthy academic environment, I welcome all comments, and would
appreciate receiving any suggestions or criticisms from you on what AIT can
do to meet the needs of its alumni and students. As former students, we have
an understanding about "a student's life at AIT" that the faculty and staff
may not necessarily have. We can provide constructive criticisms, ideas,
energy and moral support to AIT on how AIT can - and should - adapt to the
21st century.
My apology for this long email, and I hope you understand the situation
better. I may not have time to write to this list too often, but I will read
every email sent to this list, with full appreciation.
With kind regards,
Prof Worsak Kanok-Nukulchat, AIT/ST'73
