Monthly Archives: August 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (30 AUGUST 2026) – The Children Commissioners (CC), Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM), take note of media reports regarding the Perak State Government’s proposal to introduce a RM500 First-Time Marriage Incentive for youths aged between 15 and 35, which is proposed for consideration under the Perak State Budget 2027.

The CC acknowledge and appreciate the Perak State Government’s intention to assist young people in addressing the financial and social challenges associated with starting a family. However, the CC are of the view that any form of marriage incentive should not include children or individuals below the age of 18.

The CC recognize that a person aged 15 may fall within the definition of “youth” under certain youth development policies or legislation. However, from a child rights perspective and under Section 2 of Child Act 2001, a person below the age of 18 is a child. Being categorised as a “youth” should not therefore diminish nor override the need for children to receive the special protection afforded to them under child rights standards.

The CC are concerned that including children aged 15 to 17 among potential beneficiaries of a marriage incentive could send a policy message that is inconsistent with efforts to prevent and eliminate child marriage. While the intended purpose of the incentive is to ease the financial burden of young couples, providing a financial benefit specifically linked to marriage may indirectly create a perception that marriage during childhood is accepted, supported or encouraged.

Children should not be incentivized to marry

Child marriage can have far-reaching implications for children’s rights and well-being, including their education, health, development, safety, autonomy, psychosocial well-being and future opportunities. Consequently, policies and programmes that affect children should be assessed through the lens of the best interests of the child, including consideration of both direct and indirect impact on their lives.

In this regard, the CC call for the principle of the best interests of the child to be given primary consideration in the finalisation of any proposal relating to marriage incentives. Children must also be given an opportunity to express their views and have those views be taken into account in matters affecting their lives.

Consistency with the policy on compulsory secondary education

The CC further believe that the proposal should be considered within the context of Malaysia’s recent strengthening of its education framework. Malaysia has extended compulsory education to the secondary level through amendments to the Education Act 1996 (Act 550), reflecting the country’s commitment to ensuring that children remain in the education system and are not left behind after completing primary education. Upper secondary education covers those aged 16 to 17. The proposed inclusion of individuals aged 15 to 17 in a marriage incentive scheme should therefore be carefully considered, as the same age group remains within the period of secondary education.

The CC are of the view that if the proposed First-Time Marriage Incentive proceeds, eligibility should be restricted to individuals aged 18 and above. This would help ensure that the assistance provided is consistent with a child rights-based approach and efforts to prevent child marriage.

The CC further recommend that social support for children below the age of 18 who are at risk of marriage due to economic hardship should be provided before marriage is even considered. Poverty and low household income have been identified as common drivers contributing to child marriage in Malaysia. Government support and intervention ought to be in place sooner to circumvent consideration of marriage as a potential solution to families’ economic deprivation.

Such assistance could be directed towards high-risk families through financial support, measures to ensure that children remain in education, school assistance, access to Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET), social services and family-based interventions. The objective should be to ensure that children have meaningful alternatives to marriage and are able to continue learning, developing their skills and building their future.

Amend minimum age of marriage

The CC also urge the Perak State Government to consider legislative reform to establish 18 as the minimum age of marriage for both Muslim males and females in Perak. At present, section 8 of the Islamic Family Law Enactment (Perak) 2004 provides for a minimum age of 18 for males and 16 for females, while marriage below those ages may be permitted with the written permission of a Syariah Judge. The CC recommend that the minimum age of marriage be set uniformly at 18 for both males and females.

If a judicial exception mechanism for individuals below the age of 18 is retained, it should be genuinely exceptional, determined by a Syariah Judge and subject to a strict assessment based on the JKSM Standard Operating Procedure for Applications for Under-age Marriage. The assessment should include, among other matters, the child’s welfare, education, health, psychological well-being and socioeconomic circumstances.

The CC are of the view that any decision concerning an application for marriage below the age of 18 must be guided by the best interests of the child and to avoid the consideration of marriage as a response to poverty, family pressure, pregnancy, social stigma or other circumstances without first examining whether the child can be adequately protected through alternative interventions.

The appropriate approach is to support adults who wish to build a family while protecting children from being pushed or encouraged into marriage prematurely.

The CC further urge that the proposed age eligibility be reviewed before the proposal is finalised or considered under the Perak State Budget 2027.

The CC stand ready to work with the Perak State Government to ensure that policies and programmes concerning young people are developed through a child rights-based approach, giving due consideration to the best interests of children and ensuring that every child has the opportunity to grow, learn, develop and realise their full potential without being encouraged or pressured to enter into marriage while still a child.

-END-

Children’s Commissioners (CC)
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
30 August 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (18 AUGUST 2026) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) welcomes the announcement by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim of the Government’s intention to abolish the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (AUKU). This marks an important step towards a higher education environment that upholds academic freedom, institutional autonomy, freedom of expression and association, and meaningful student participation.

SUHAKAM recalls that concerns over restrictions imposed by AUKU are longstanding. In Muhammad Hilman Idham & Ors v Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors, the Court of Appeal, by majority, held that the then section 15(5)(a) of AUKU, which restricted students from expressing support for or opposition to political parties, was unconstitutional. The Court affirmed that restrictions on freedom of speech must be reasonable and justifiable under Article 10(2)(a) of the Federal Constitution, finding no sufficient nexus between a university student’s expression of political support or opposition and the protection of public order or morality.

The decision carries significance beyond the provision challenged. It affirms that students do not cease to enjoy their constitutional rights upon entering university and that restrictions on those rights must not be arbitrary or disproportionate. Universities should foster critical inquiry, independent thought and responsible participation in public life. In the words of Justice Hishamudin Yunus, delivering the judgment of the Court of Appeal, “Universities should be the breeding ground of reformers and thinkers and not institutions to produce students trained as robots”.

SUHAKAM therefore views the proposed abolition of AUKU as more than the repeal of a statute. It provides an opportunity to reshape the relationship between the State, universities, academics and students by strengthening institutional independence while ensuring transparency and accountability. Given AUKU’s role in the establishment, constitutions and governance structures of public universities, its repeal should be accompanied by clear transitional arrangements to ensure continuity in university administration without reproducing provisions that unnecessarily restrict fundamental freedoms.

SUHAKAM notes the Prime Minister’s assurance that any future arrangement should not reintroduce restrictions on student freedom. Any new or revised higher education framework should be grounded in human rights principles and developed through meaningful consultation with students, academics, university leadership, civil society and other relevant stakeholders. It should also extend beyond student political participation by safeguarding the ability of academics and researchers to teach, research, publish, exchange ideas and participate in public discourse without undue interference or fear of retaliation, while protecting students’ rights to express their views, associate and assemble peacefully, subject only to restrictions that are lawful, necessary and proportionate.

Institutional autonomy must also be meaningful in practice, balancing accountability for public resources with safeguards against undue interference in academic affairs. After more than five decades of AUKU, its proposed abolition should bring substantive change to Malaysia’s higher education landscape. Ultimately, universities should be places where ideas can be freely challenged and debated, and where students are empowered to think critically and contribute meaningfully to society.

-END-

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
18 August 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (4 AUGUST 2026) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) is deeply concerned that the Court of Appeal’s decision to uphold the stay of the High Court’s orders relating to the investigation into the enforced disappearance of Pastor Raymond Koh will further impede efforts to establish the truth and achieve accountability. The ruling also maintains the stay on the enforcement of the damages awarded by the High Court.

While SUHAKAM fully respects the independence of the judiciary and the judicial process, the Commission is deeply concerned that the continued delay in implementing the High Court’s orders will further prolong the search for truth and justice in a case that has remained unresolved for more than nine years.

In its landmark 2019 Public Inquiry, SUHAKAM concluded that Pastor Raymond Koh was the victim of an enforced disappearance carried out by agents of the State. In November 2025, the High Court similarly found the Government and the police liable for his enforced disappearance and ordered, among others, that investigations be reopened. Those findings represented an important step towards accountability and offered renewed hope to the family that the truth would finally be uncovered.

The passage of time inevitably increases the risk that evidence may deteriorate, witnesses may become unavailable, and investigative opportunities may be irretrievably lost. Delays in cases involving alleged enforced disappearance not only undermine the effectiveness of investigations but also prolong the suffering of families who have endured years of uncertainty regarding the fate and whereabouts of their loved ones.

Enforced disappearance constitutes one of the gravest violations of human rights. It violates multiple fundamental rights, including the rights to life, liberty, security of person, recognition before the law, and access to an effective remedy. The continuing uncertainty surrounding the fate of the disappeared also inflicts prolonged psychological suffering on their families, who themselves are recognised as victims under international human rights standards.

SUHAKAM reiterates that investigations into alleged enforced disappearances must be prompt, thorough, independent, impartial and effective. Accountability is indispensable not only to provide justice for victims and their families but also to uphold public confidence in the rule of law and ensure that such violations are never repeated. SUHAKAM also renews its call for Malaysia to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED) and to criminalise enforced disappearance as a distinct offence under domestic law. These measures would strengthen Malaysia’s legal framework for preventing enforced disappearances, ensuring accountability, and providing effective remedies for victims and their families.

SUHAKAM stands in solidarity with the family of Pastor Raymond Koh in their continued pursuit of truth and justice. We remain steadfast in advocating for accountability, transparency and respect for human rights, and hope that the legal process will ultimately lead to the full disclosure of the truth regarding Pastor Koh’s disappearance and accountability for those responsible.

-END-

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
4 August 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (1 AUGUST 2026) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) expresses concern over the police investigations involving environmental activist Shakila Zen, who has been called to provide a statement in connection with a social media post allegedly linking the Pahang royal institution to sand mining activities.

According to reports, the investigation is being conducted under Section 500 of the Penal Code and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA). While SUHAKAM recognises the legitimate role of law enforcement in investigating alleged offences, any action taken must be necessary, proportionate and consistent with Malaysia’s obligations to uphold human rights, particularly the right to freedom of expression.

Freedom of expression is guaranteed under Article 10(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution and recognised under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). While Malaysia is not yet a party to the ICCPR, Article 19 reflects internationally recognised standards on freedom of expression. Although this right may be subject to lawful restrictions, such limitations must be necessary, proportionate and should not discourage legitimate public discourse on matters of public interest.

Environmental defenders play a vital role in promoting transparency, accountability and public participation in environmental governance. By drawing attention to environmental risks and the impacts of development on affected communities, they contribute to informed public discourse and strengthen environmental governance through greater scrutiny and accountability. This is consistent with Malaysia’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (NAPBHR), which emphasises transparency, meaningful stakeholder engagement and the protection of environmental rights to ensure that development is undertaken responsibly and sustainably. Individuals advocating for environmental protection should therefore be able to carry out their work freely and safely, without fear of intimidation, harassment or reprisals.

The United Nations General Assembly, through Resolution 76/300, recognised the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a universal human right. This right is also affirmed at the regional level through the ASEAN Declaration on the Right to a Safe, Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment, which underscores the commitment of ASEAN Member States to environmental protection and the enjoyment of environmental rights. The effective enjoyment of this right depends on the protection of procedural environmental rights, including access to information, public participation, access to justice, and the ability to freely express concerns relating to environmental matters.

SUHAKAM also notes with concern reports that Shakila Zen has previously been subjected to threats and harassment in connection with her advocacy work. Human rights defenders should be afforded effective protection against threats, violence, and other forms of retaliation arising from the peaceful exercise of their rights. In line with the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, States have a responsibility to ensure that individuals and organisations are able to promote and protect human rights in a safe and enabling environment. This includes safeguarding the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and participation in public affairs, particularly on issues affecting the environment and the wellbeing of communities.

SUHAKAM therefore calls upon the relevant authorities to ensure that any investigation is conducted fairly, independently and in accordance with the principles of necessity, proportionality and due process. The Commission further urges all authorities to ensure that laws are not applied in a manner that creates a chilling effect on legitimate environmental advocacy or discourages public participation in matters concerning environmental protection and sustainable development.

SUHAKAM remains committed to promoting and protecting human rights for all and reiterates that protecting environmental defenders and preserving civic space are essential to advancing environmental justice, sustainable development and the enjoyment of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.

-END-

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
1 August 2026