Multiple people injured in shooting at Virginia State University
School said shooting involved ‘multiple suspects’ as campus was locked down and police responded to scene
Multiple people were injured in a shooting at Virginia State University, police said on Saturday morning, with several suspects still at large.
The campus, about 20 miles (32km) south of Richmond, was on lockdown when police released initial details about the shooting.
“A shooting occurred in the area of the Quad Annexes involving multiple victims, who were transported to area hospitals. Police are on scene and request that you avoid the area,” the VSU police department said in a statement.
VSU said the shooting involved “multiple suspects”. The university said none of the injuries appear to be life-threatening.
Local news outlet WTVR reported that five people were injured, citing local authorities. Chesterfield police told WTVR that police were called to university dormitories at 1.30am.
As of Saturday morning, there had been nearly 300 mass shootings reported across the US so far for the year, according to the Gun Violence Archive.
The nonpartisan resources defines mass shootings as cases in which at least four victims are wounded or killed.
The US has perennially registered high numbers of mass shootings, with a considerable portion of those occurring at school and university campuses or activities. Those numbers have prompted calls for more substantial federal gun control, though Congress over the years has not implemented such restrictions.
Minister of Entrepreneurial Development and Cooperatives Steven Sim, who is also DAP deputy secretary-general, speaks about his party’s role in the unity government, stressing that political alliances with former rivals does not necessarily mean a betrayal of values. There are common principles based on the country’s constitution that bind their working relationship, he adds. - Scoop pic, August 15, 2026
Party deputy sec-sen says working with former political rivals does not mean compromising core values, ahead of key vote by delegates on DAP’s role in government tomorrow
KUALA LUMPUR — DAP’s participation in a coalition government that includes Umno should not be seen as a willingness to compromise its core principles, said party deputy secretary-general Steven Sim.
Responding to criticism that DAP’s current cooperation with former political rivals is a departure from the party’s reformist and democratic values, Sim said political alliances should not be viewed as permanent.
“In politics, there’s no one who is forever your friend or your permanent enemy, but only permanent principles,” Sim said in the latest episode of Trick Lama, a podcast co-hosted by Big Boom Media Group Chief Executive Officer Datuk Zainul Arifin, Group Editor-in-Chief Terence Fernandez and Group Adviser Datuk “Rocky” Ahiruddin Attan.
Sim was citing a view held by DAP’s late chairman Karpal Singh, who had said that political parties may change partners, but their principles should remain.
Sim also said DAP, which is marking its 60th anniversary at its national congress tomorrow, had worked with different parties and in different coalitions throughout its history as an opposition party.
However, he added, political cooperation in a coalition “does not necessarily translate to compromise”.
His remarks come as DAP delegates prepare to vote at the national congress tomorrow on, among other matters, whether the party should remain in the federal government following its poor results in the Sabah election last year and its losses in the recent Johor and Negeri Sembilan state elections. The party has also come under fire for staying quiet on various transparency, governance and reform issues, along with sentiments that the long-time opposition party had lost its teeth after tasting federal power.
Sim, who is Minister of Entrepreneurial Development and Cooperatives, noted that the formation of the current unity government, following the 15th general election in November 2022, had been driven by the need to restore political stability after the Covid-19 pandemic, economic difficulties and three changes of government.
The government was formed following the decree of then Yang di-Pertuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah, and the broader desire among Malaysians for a stable administration, he added.
“Health crisis, economic crisis, political crisis. So it was the aspiration, not only of His Majesty, but the aspiration of the people of Malaysia, that you want a stable politics. You want a stable government,” he said.
According to Sim, DAP’s decision to enter the unity government was therefore never simply about securing Cabinet positions or political power.
“We are very clear. To come together, it is not for the interest of having a position or merely to be a minister,” added Sim, who is also DAP Penang chairman.
He noted how parties in the unity government had agreed on the constitutional values and principles that would serve as the basis for their cooperation, saying this showed it was not a “marriage of convenience”, but that there was a basis that bound all parties involved, friends and foes alike.
Sim said this distinction was important to remember for DAP members and supporters who may accept the need for political cooperation but who now feel the party has betrayed its core values.
“Members of DAP and our supporters want to see that, yes, we agreed for you to form this government, a unity government under the decree of His Majesty. But that doesn’t mean it is a blank cheque to say, you set aside our core values,” he said.
He said the question facing DAP was therefore not simply whether it should work with one party or another, but whether such cooperation remained consistent with the principles that underpin the party.
Sim also pushed back against the assumption that DAP delegates would vote tomorrow based on emotion.
“I am confident that delegates will make a wise choice, a wise decision, based on not only the interests of the party itself alone, but also really the interests of the country,” he said.
Sim added that the delegates are “rakyat Malaysia” and their decision tomorrow would reflect the aspirations and anxieties of Malaysian society.
“And on this part, I am very confident that they will make a decision that is in the interest of our country.” — August 15, 2026
[1] Malaysia must be one of the most scandal-plagued nations in the world. We lurch from one to another with sickening regularity. The vast majority share a common denominator: they involve Bumiputera-led agencies or institutions established to advance the Bumiputera agenda.
[2] It is not that Bumiputeras are inherently more corrupt or that other communities are more honest. Corruption cuts across all ethnicities and religious groups; many non-Malays have profited handsomely through partnerships with Bumiputera patrons in enterprises sustained by graft. The issue is not race but power. It is axiomatic that the greater the concentration of power, the greater the opportunity for corruption. In Malaysia, those levers of power happen to sit largely in Bumiputera hands; place them elsewhere and the faces would change, not the pattern. That all four living former prime ministers, and a possible future one, have been investigated, charged or imprisoned should tell us as much about the nexus between power and corruption.
[3] It is common knowledge that a vast architecture of patronage, rent-seeking and cronyism now surrounds much of the Bumiputera agenda. Schemes worth billions have been launched with vague objectives, lax oversight, poor leadership, and rampant political interference. The opportunities for plunder are massive. Huge fortunes have been made by those in power; no minister’s salary ever produced the fortunes many of our politicians and their families now command. Behind every great fortune, as the saying goes, lies a great crime.
[4] Daim Zainuddin, no saint himself, warned in 2018 of dozens of “mini-1MDBs” waiting to be uncovered, decrying “the shameless robbing of the very institutions that were established to help and uplift our rakyat” and calling the pillage of Bumiputera-led trust bodies like FELDA, LTAT, Tabung Haji and KWAP “astounding and heart-breaking” — bodies whose very purpose was to safeguard the dignity and welfare of the community they were meant to serve. Yet awareness of the problem has changed nothing.
[5] The worst of it is the impunity. A scandal breaks; there is loud condemnation, a flurry of investigations, perhaps a charge or two, then silence — or a discharge not amounting to acquittal. Coverups are the rule, not the exception; rarely is anyone held to account. Crooks are shielded and, in time, promoted or appointed to even higher positions while critics are silenced or intimidated.
[6] Worse still, whenever corrupt Bumiputeras are investigated or charged, it is disingenuously cast by some politicians as a plot to destroy the Malays. Others, meanwhile, argue that the blame lies with the individuals concerned, not the parties they belong to. Perhaps — but the pertinent question is what the party and its leaders did when the allegations first surfaced. For the most part, they did nothing. That silence makes them complicit.
[7] Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who rode to power on the promise of reform, had the opportunity to thoroughly clean house, bring all the crooks to justice and put in place a rigorous system to end the impunity; he did not. There will probably not be another opportunity for a long time to come.
[8] Bumiputera agencies are invariably deemed too important to fail; every time there is a problem, the government rushes in to bail them out. 1MDB saddled taxpayers with a RM51.4 billion liability, of which RM8.9 billion will not be cleared until 2039. Tabung Haji was rescued only when the government absorbed a shortfall of some RM10 billion. FELDA carries a further RM10 billion of its own in losses and debt. The Littoral Combat Ship project, originally awarded to an LTAT subsidiary, has become an RM11.22 billion burden, with not a single vessel yet in service more than a decade after the project was awarded. And these are merely the latest — quite possibly just the tip of the iceberg.
[9] Understandably, this breeds resentment among taxpayers of every community. Many are barred from these programmes by design, yet when the programmes collapse under the weight of corruption and mismanagement, it is the taxes of all Malaysians — beneficiaries or not — that are called upon to make good the loss.
[10] The graft, mismanagement and impunity within Bumiputera-led trust bodies and agencies have gone on long enough. Malaysians — Bumiputera and non-Bumiputera — deserve better. If Bumiputeras need help, let it be given professionally, transparently and at fair cost. Government programmes are not Bumiputera projects to be run by Bumiputeras alone; they are national undertakings that ought to be placed in the most competent and honest hands available, whatever their race or faith. A closed system rife with political interference, feeble accountability and easy impunity is too ripe for abuse to be allowed to stand. But those benefiting most from the rot are the ones we’re counting on to clean it up — so don’t hold your breath.
The Yasukuni Shrine is dedicated to 2.5 million war dead, mostly Japanese, including convicted war criminals involved in Imperial Japan’s invasion and occupation of parts of Asia in the 1930s and 1940s.
Japan’s neighbours have long seen the site and the regular visits by senior politicians as symbolic of the country’s failure to atone for the atrocities its forces committed.
Koizumi, who has long been a regular visitor to Yasukuni, left the shrine without responding to reporters’ questions. He later said on Instagram that he visited to “offer his sincere condolences to the heroic spirits who sacrificed their precious lives for the nation”.
“Along with our vow to renounce war, I reaffirmed our determination to continue fulfilling our responsibility to uphold Japan’s postwar path as a peaceful nation,” he added.
A man gestures as people pay a silent tribute to the war dead at Yasukuni Shrine, in Tokyo, Japan, on August 15 [Issei Kato/Reuters]
There had been some speculation that Japan’s Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, also a regular visitor before becoming prime minister in October, might attend the shrine, but she did not make the visit. Local media reported that Takaichi had sent an offering to the shrine, as previous prime ministers have done.
‘Anachronistic’
China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the nation “strongly condemns” Takaichi’s offering and the minister’s visit to the shrine.
“We have lodged … strong protests with the Japanese side,” the ministry said.
South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed “deep regret” over what it called the “anachronistic” actions of Japanese leaders who sent offerings or visited Yasukuni Shrine, and urged Japan’s leaders to face history and demonstrate through actions “humble reflection and sincere remorse” for the past.
Among the 2.5 million war dead commemorated at Yasukuni are 14 wartime leaders convicted of the most serious war crimes, along with at least 1,000 others found guilty by Allied tribunals after Japan’s 1945 defeat in World War II. Japanese officials have explained past visits as being in their personal capacity to honour those who died in the nation’s wars.
Japanese defence ministers have attended Yasukuni before, the last one being Minoru Kihara in 2024.
The last sitting Japanese prime minister to visit the shrine was Shinzo Abe in December 2013, when he drew an expression of disappointment from the administration of then-United States President Barack Obama.
The Malaysian government's decision to abolish the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (AUKU) marks a significant shift in redefining the relationship between university students and the country's democratic system.
Enacted during a different political era, AUKU has been synonymous with limiting student political activities.
The abolition of AUKU offers universities the chance to become arenas for democratic engagement, emphasizing student autonomy, accountability, and political awareness.
This change challenges Malaysian universities to prepare students not just for employment, but for active and responsible participation in democracy.
First Published: Saturday, 15 Aug 2026 4:36 PM MYT
AUGUST 15 — For 55 years, the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (AUKU) has defined the boundaries of student life and political participation in Malaysian public universities.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s announcement that the government intends to abolish AUKU therefore represents more than the repeal of a controversial law. It provides Malaysia with an opportunity to reconsider the relationship between university students and the country's democratic system.
AUKU was introduced in 1971, when Malaysia was navigating a very different political and social environment. Over the decades, particularly following amendments in the 1970s, the Act became associated with restrictions on student political activities, organisations and activism.
Successive governments have since amended AUKU several times. Restrictions have gradually been relaxed and student organisations have been given greater room to operate.
But Malaysia in 2026 is fundamentally different from Malaysia in 1971.
If AUKU is finally abolished after 55 years, the question should therefore not simply be whether students will become freer.
The real question is what Malaysia expects its university students to do with that freedom.
Universities as democratic training grounds
Malaysia is a parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy. Malaysians elect representatives, political parties compete for support, Parliament debates legislation and governments are ultimately accountable to citizens through elections.
Students and Muda members converge outside UiTM Shah Alam with red flags and armbands after they were blocked from attending the event organised by Muda affiliate Ikatan Mahasiswa Demokratik in 2023. — File picture by Miera Zulyana
Understanding this system should not begin only after graduation.
Universities should be among the places where young Malaysians learn how democracy actually works.
Students should be able to organise debates on government policies, invite representatives from different political parties, question politicians, discuss legislation and disagree openly with one another.
This does not mean universities should encourage students to become partisan.
Quite the opposite.
Universities should teach students that politics is larger than political parties. Democracy requires citizens who can examine evidence, evaluate policies, understand institutions and listen to arguments with which they disagree.
A university should therefore prepare students not merely for employment, but also for citizenship.
Undi18 changed the equation
The case for this becomes stronger following Undi18.
An 18-year-old Malaysian can vote. Young Malaysians can participate in political campaigns and political parties and, subject to the relevant laws, seek elected office.
This means many university students are already active participants in Malaysia's democratic system.
They are not citizens-in-waiting.
A student may cast a ballot in a general election while completing an undergraduate degree. It becomes increasingly difficult to argue that the same student is mature enough to help decide who governs Malaysia but requires excessive protection from political discussions on campus.
The post-AUKU university should recognise this new reality.
Political awareness should not be treated as a threat to university life. It should become part of preparing young Malaysians to understand the country they will eventually inherit and lead.
Autonomy without political capture
Greater freedom, however, cannot mean allowing universities to become extensions of Malaysia's political parties.
There is an important distinction between political participation and political capture.
Government and opposition politicians should both be able to engage university audiences. But students should be equally free to challenge both.
No political party should assume that greater campus freedom gives it the right to turn universities into recruitment grounds.
The objective should be exposure to competing ideas.
A student who supports the government and another who opposes it should be able to attend the same political forum, challenge the same speaker and leave with different conclusions.
Learning to disagree without treating political opponents as enemies is itself part of democratic education.
Malaysia needs more of this, not less.
Let student politics matter again
The end of AUKU should also encourage Malaysia to reconsider student representation.
Student organisations should have meaningful autonomy to manage their activities, finances and elections. Student representatives should be able to question university decisions and advocate student interests without being treated as adversaries of university management.
There is educational value in this.
Running an election teaches campaigning. Managing an organisation teaches accountability. Debating an opponent teaches persuasion. Managing funds teaches responsibility. Losing an election teaches something equally important: accepting democratic outcomes.
These are experiences that cannot be fully reproduced in lecture halls.
Campus democracy can become a practical introduction to the responsibilities that accompany citizenship.
Some of Malaysia's future politicians, civil servants, entrepreneurs, academics and community leaders are sitting in university classrooms today. Allowing them to experience democratic leadership early can strengthen, rather than weaken, Malaysia's political culture.
Freedom must come with responsibility
None of this means students will suddenly be free from rules.
The abolition of AUKU does not place university students above Malaysian law.
Students remain citizens subject to the same legal responsibilities as everyone else. Political freedom does not excuse violence, intimidation, harassment or unlawful conduct.
The difference is philosophical.
Universities should maintain order without unnecessarily policing political thought.
At the same time, students seeking greater autonomy must accept the accountability that accompanies it. Independent student organisations must manage money transparently.
Elections must be fair. Competing opinions must be respected. Freedom of expression cannot mean freedom only for those with whom one agrees.
Autonomy and responsibility must develop together.
The new social contract
The danger now is that Malaysia abolishes AUKU only to reproduce its philosophy under another name.
Whatever framework eventually replaces it should begin from a different assumption: university students are adult citizens participating in a democratic Malaysia.
The relationship should therefore move from excessive control towards democratic autonomy.
Students should be trusted to organise, debate, vote, challenge ideas and participate in national conversations. In return, they must accept responsibility for how those freedoms are exercised.
For 55 years, Malaysia repeatedly debated how much political freedom university students should be permitted.
The end of AUKU offers an opportunity to ask how Malaysian universities can prepare students to exercise democratic freedom responsibly.
If the country gets that answer right, abolishing AUKU will mean more than removing a law enacted in 1971.
It could establish a new social contract between Malaysian universities, their students and the democracy they are preparing the next generation to inherit.
* Phar Kim Beng is professor of Asean Studies, and director at the Institute of International and Asean Studies, International Islamic University Malaysia.
PKR delegates attend the party’s 2026 National Congress at the Melaka International Trade Centre in Ayer Keroh, amid president Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s plea for the party’s estranged veterans’ support once more. — Bernama pic
Summary
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim urged former PKR leaders and members to return to the party, apologizing to those who felt marginalized, amid recent departures and internal tensions.
His appeal comes as PKR faces electoral challenges and seeks to bolster unity ahead of the next general election.
Anwar's call was made during the PKR National Congress 2026 in Ayer Keroh, where he addressed the need for reconciliation following significant setbacks in regions like Johor, Sabah, and Negeri Sembilan.
The party also faces uncertainty with Nurul Izzah Anwar's resignation from the deputy presidency, adding pressure on Anwar to consolidate party cohesion.
By Malay Mail First Published: Saturday, 15 Aug 2026 4:58 PM MYT
AYER KEROH, Aug 15 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today appealed to former PKR leaders and members who have drifted away from the party to return, while apologising to those who may have felt sidelined.
His call comes as PKR faces a series of internal tensions and recent departures, including former Subang MP Wong Chen who quit the party earlier this week, while former leaders Chua Tian Chang and Dr Xavier Jayakumar were seen at the party’s national congress here today.
“Otai-otai... please return,” Anwar was quoted by news portal Malaysiakini as saying in his policy speech at the PKR National Congress 2026 at the Melaka International Trade Centre here.
Otai-otai is Malay slang for ‘old hands’ or veterans.
“For my other friends, who may have felt a little marginalised – if we have made any mistakes, I apologise. Return to the path of our struggle,” Anwar added.
Anwar’s appeal for reconciliation comes ahead of the next general election, with PKR also facing questions over its electoral performance following setbacks in Johor, Sabah and Negeri Sembilan.
Earlier today, PKR Women’s information chief Ginie Lim posted a photograph of herself with Chua, better known as Tian Chua, and Dr Xavier at the congress, marking a notable reunion of former party figures.
Chua was sacked from PKR after contesting the Batu parliamentary seat as an independent in the last general election, while Dr Xavier resigned from the party in 2021 after supporting then-prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.
Wong, who served PKR for 17 years, resigned from the party on August 10 and joined Bersama, which is co-led by former PKR leaders Rafizi Ramli and Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad.
PKR is also dealing with uncertainty over its deputy presidency after Anwar’s daughter Nurul Izzah Anwar sought to resign from the post, with the party instead placing her on indefinite temporary leave and assigning her duties to vice-president Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail.
Nurul Izzah has since reiterated her intention to step down, saying she plans to pursue further studies and focus on commitments outside politics.
In Negeri Sembilan, PKR retained only two of the five state seats it previously held despite contesting 16 constituencies, including former menteri besar Datuk Seri Aminuddin Harun, who lost his seat.
Six PKR state division chiefs subsequently wrote to Anwar seeking a review of Aminuddin’s leadership following the result.
The party’s recent setbacks and departures have added pressure on Anwar to strengthen internal cohesion as PKR prepares for the next electoral contest.
Instagram screengrab shows Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim announcing a full repeal of the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA) at the 2026 PKR National Congress in Melaka on August 15, 2026.
Summary
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim announced the government's decision to repeal the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA) to address student demands for more liberty.
Despite numerous amendments aimed at enhancing student freedoms, such as participating in political activities and revising disciplinary procedures, dissatisfaction persisted, leading to this move.
The government's repeal marks a departure from previous strategies that sought to amend rather than abolish the Act, which has been a longstanding framework for public university governance in Malaysia.
This decision highlights a significant policy shift in response to advocacy from student groups and aligns with Anwar's previous commitments to remove constraints on student and academic freedom.
By Malay Mail First Published: Saturday, 15 Aug 2026 11:15 AM MYT
AYER KEROH, Aug 15 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today announced that the government will repeal the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA), following continued calls from students for greater freedom.
Anwar, who is also PKR president, said the decision came after several amendments to the Act failed to address all concerns raised by university students, local media reported.
“University students feel that they should be free. We have given them greater freedom through amendments to the UUCA (previously), but there are still some who are dissatisfied, and they have submitted a memorandum,” he said in his policy speech at the 2026 PKR National Congress at the Melaka International Trade Centre here.
“So today, I want to announce that we will repeal the Act.”
The announcement marks a significant shift from the government’s previous approach of amending UUCA to give students greater freedom while retaining the law as the framework for public university governance.
UUCA has been amended several times since it was introduced in 1971, including changes in 2012 that allowed students to participate in political party activities outside campus.
The latest amendments, passed in 2024, included changes to student disciplinary procedures and financial management, including allowing student representative councils and student bodies to collect money and receive contributions subject to prevailing laws and regulations.
In 2023, Anwar had said sections of UUCA restricting the freedom of students and academics would be repealed, while the Higher Education Ministry said at the time that it intended to retain the Act but amend it to give students greater freedom in political activities.
The 2024 amendments also shifted disciplinary decisions involving public university students from the vice-chancellor to Student Disciplinary Committees through amendments to Section 16B.
The amendments further revised Section 15A to allow student representative councils and student bodies to raise funds and receive contributions, subject to applicable written laws and regulations.
UUCA, enacted in 1971, provides the legal framework for the governance and administration of public universities in Malaysia.
Student groups have for years called for the Act to be repealed, particularly provisions they say restrict student participation in politics and public affairs, with Anwar himself previously pledging to remove sections that limited student and academic freedom.
The government’s 2024 amendments had instead focused on improving university governance, student activities and disciplinary procedures while retaining UUCA as the governing framework.
