Posts in category: Press Statement

KUALA LUMPUR (21 SEPTEMBER 2026) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) expresses serious concern over the decision allowing former Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Razak to serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest. While SUHAKAM fully respects the constitutional prerogative of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in matters of pardon under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution, this decision raises significant concerns regarding equality before the law, the administration of justice, and public confidence in Malaysia’s commitment to accountability and the rule of law.

Article 8 of the Federal Constitution guarantees that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to its equal protection. This principle must remain at the heart of the criminal justice system. Where a convicted person is permitted to serve a custodial sentence under substantially different conditions from other prisoners, there must be a clear legal basis, transparent and objective criteria, and safeguards against unequal or preferential treatment. Any perception that status, position or influence may result in more favourable treatment risks eroding confidence in the equal administration of justice.

SUHAKAM is particularly concerned about the legal framework governing the present arrangement. In December 2025, High Court Judge Justice Alice Loke Yee Ching held that a house-arrest order was not capable of execution because there was no legal provision establishing such a mechanism in Malaysia. The Court also rejected the argument that release on licence under section 43 of the Prison Act 1995 could simply be equated with house arrest. Against this background, serious questions arise as to the legal basis, enforcement, monitoring and accountability of the present arrangement. Administrative guidelines or ad hoc arrangements should not substitute for a clear legislative framework.

The latest decision must also be considered in the context of the substantial clemency already granted in 2024. Dato’ Sri Najib’s original sentence of 12 years’ imprisonment in the SRC International case was reduced to six years, while his RM210 million fine was reduced to RM50 million. Permitting the remainder of that reduced custodial sentence to be served at home represents a further significant concession. The gravity of the underlying offences must equally remain in view. In the SRC International case, Dato’ Sri Najib was convicted on seven charges of abuse of power, criminal breach of trust and money laundering involving RM42 million. His conviction and sentence were ultimately upheld by the Federal Court. These were serious corruption offences involving public funds and an abuse of the trust attached to the country’s highest political office.

Public-interest concerns are further heightened by Dato’ Sri Najib’s subsequent conviction in the 1MDB case on four charges of abuse of power and 21 charges of money laundering involving approximately RM2.2 billion. The High Court sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment and imposed a fine of RM11.38 billion. SUHAKAM recognises that this conviction remains subject to the appellate process and should therefore be treated in accordance with the law pending the outcome of the appeal. SUHAKAM also notes that there has been no clear public acknowledgement of wrongdoing or expression of remorse in relation to the SRC offences, despite the conviction having been conclusively upheld by the Federal Court. Accountability and genuine remorse are relevant to the broader public understanding of clemency, particularly where serious corruption and abuse of public office are involved.

This decision therefore raises concerns extending beyond the circumstances of one individual. It risks weakening public confidence in the administration of justice and Malaysia’s anti-corruption efforts, particularly if it creates the perception that accountability for serious corruption operates differently for those who have held positions of power. Such a perception would undermine the principle of equality before the law and the integrity of the justice system.

The rule of law is tested most clearly when it is applied to those who have held power. Any departure from the ordinary administration of a custodial sentence must therefore rest on a clear legal basis and be capable of transparent and objective justification. Equality before the law cannot be merely a constitutional promise, it must be reflected consistently in the administration of justice, regardless of a person’s status, position or influence.

-END-

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
21 September 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (17 SEPTEMBER 2026) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) expresses concern over recent remarks made at a political gathering in which Christian religious figures and a passage from the Bible were used as part of a sexually suggestive joke.

Regardless of whether the remarks were intended as humour, religious figures, sacred texts and religious practices should not be sexualised, distorted or used for political entertainment. Such remarks can cause deep hurt to the religious community concerned and undermine mutual trust in Malaysia’s multi-religious society. Malaysia’s diversity demands equal respect for all faiths. There should be no double standard when it comes to religious sensitivities: those who expect their own beliefs and traditions to be respected must extend the same respect to those of others.

Freedom of expression is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. Its exercise, however, carries responsibilities, particularly when addressing religion and other matters that may affect relations among communities. Political leaders and public figures, given the reach and influence of their words, bear a particular responsibility to avoid remarks that demean religious beliefs or figures, marginalise communities, or risk provoking hostility.

SUHAKAM takes note of the apology issued in relation to the remarks. In matters involving religious sensitivities, an apology should be clear, sincere and unconditional, and acknowledge the hurt caused. A meaningful apology should go beyond responding to public criticism and demonstrate a genuine commitment to learn from the incident, avoid its recurrence and rebuild trust.

SUHAKAM urges all parties to respond calmly and responsibly. Any assessment by the authorities must be conducted independently, impartially and in accordance with the law, with due regard to the full context of the remarks. Any restriction on freedom of expression must meet the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality, while enforcement must be consistent and non-selective. Public concern should likewise be expressed through lawful and peaceful means. Political leaders, commentators and social media users should refrain from amplifying the incident in ways that could fuel hostility, collective blame or further division.

Malaysia’s religious harmony must never be taken for granted. The experience of Sabah and Sarawak, in particular, demonstrates that people of different faiths and backgrounds can live together peacefully when relationships are grounded in mutual respect, equality and genuine acceptance of one another.

SUHAKAM reiterates that religion must never be exploited for political amusement or advantage. Respect for religious figures, sacred texts, beliefs and adherents of every faith is fundamental to protecting human dignity and preserving Malaysia’s peace, harmony and unity.

-END-

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
17 September 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (12 SEPTEMBER 2026) – The Children’s Commissioners (CC), Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM), expresses grave concern over the recent attack on a two year old girl by five roaming dogs in Batu Pahat, Johor.

The child was reportedly attacked outside her grandmother’s home at about 7.00 a.m. on 5 September 2026 and sustained serious injuries before being taken to district hospital and subsequently transferred to Hospital Sultanah Aminah in Johor Bahru for further treatment. The Children’s Commissioners extend concern and solidarity to the child and her family, and hope for her continued recovery.

This incident must not be viewed as an isolated occurrence. Based on media reports reviewed by the CC, at least eight serious cases involving children being attacked or bitten by roaming or stray dogs have been reported since 2023, including cases resulting in death. These include attacks involving very young children in Pitas, Klang, Semporna, Langkawi, Sungai Buloh and Cheras, as well as the recent Batu Pahat incident. A separate case in Kuching in 2026 involved a 10-year-old boy who died following a dog bite and subsequent rabies infection.

At least three child fatalities can be identified from the media reports reviewed, namely in Semporna in 2024, Sungai Buloh in 2025 and Kuching in 2026. This review should not, however, be treated as comprehensive national statistics. What is particularly concerning is the vulnerability of the children involved. Some victims were as young as one or two years old. Reported incidents have occurred not only in remote locations, but in or near homes, residential areas and places associated with children’s daily activities. In Klang, for example, an 11-year-old girl was reportedly attacked by two dogs while taking out rubbish and required surgery. In Cheras, a six-year-old boy was attacked while riding his bicycle near his home.

The risk is also not limited to dog bites. In Sitiawan, a child reportedly ran into a road after being chased by a dog and narrowly avoided being hit by a vehicle. In Kedah last month, a school pupil reportedly fell into a drain after being chased by a group of dogs while cycling to school. These incidents demonstrate that roaming or aggressive dogs can create wider risks of falls, road accidents and other serious injuries.

Children have the right to live, play, walk and travel to school in environments that are reasonably safe from foreseeable and preventable risks. Very young children are especially vulnerable because of their physical size, limited ability to defend themselves and limited capacity to respond appropriately when confronted by aggressive animals.

The CC therefore call for a fundamental shift from reactive response after tragedy to proactive prevention before a child is harmed. Action against dangerous or aggressive dogs should not only take place after a child has been hospitalised, seriously injured or lost their life. Where a risk is known, foreseeable and reasonably preventable, preventive action must be taken.

The CC call for all local authorities to establish child-sensitive roaming-dog hotspots, particularly around schools, TASKA and kindergartens, playgrounds, People’s Housing Program (PPR) and flat housing, residential areas, school walking and cycling routes, bus stops and locations with repeated complaints involving aggressive or roaming dogs.

The CC further call on Ministry of Housing and Local Government (KPKT) and State Governments, in collaboration with local authorities (PBT) and the Department of Veterinary Services (DVS), to establish clearer, risk-based response standards:

1. Map and identify hotspots, prioritising areas regularly used by children;
2. Prioritise complaints involving packs or aggressive dogs around homes, schools, playgrounds and other child-sensitive locations;
3. Establish clear SOPs and escalation procedures – from complaint and risk assessment to intervention, feedback and follow-up monitoring;
4. Conduct proactive and coordinated PBT-DVS operations, rather than waiting for a serious attack to occur;
5. Strengthen national data collection on animal attacks involving children, including age, location, injury severity, rabies-related outcomes and intervention outcomes;
6. Implement long-term population and risk management, including responsible ownership, registration and licensing, prevention of abandonment, evidence-based sterilisation, waste and food-source management, appropriate facilities, and stronger cooperation between authorities, NGOs and communities; and
7. Ensure all enforcement is humane and lawful, consistent with the Animal Welfare Act 2015 and other applicable laws and procedures.

Protecting children does not mean disregarding animal welfare. Both objectives can and must be pursued together. Effective animal management should be child-safe, humane, professional and lawful – not indiscriminate or cruel.

The CC also stress that safety education for children, parents, schools and childcare providers is important, including guidance on avoiding aggressive animals and obtaining prompt medical attention following a bite. However, safety education must never transfer responsibility for managing a known public safety risk from authorities to children.

A young child should not have to avoid playing outside their home, using a playground or travelling to school because of a foreseeable risk posed by roaming dogs. When a danger to children is known and reasonably preventable, we cannot wait for another tragedy before acting. Effective management of roaming and aggressive dogs is not merely an animal-management issue; where children are exposed to foreseeable risk, it is a matter of child safety and protection.

The Children’s Commissioners therefore call on the Federal Government, State Governments and all local authorities to act now – not after the next child is seriously harmed. Children’s safety must be built through prevention, preparedness and timely intervention, not only through action after tragedy has occurred.

-END-

Children’s Commissioners (CC)
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
12 September 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (11 SEPTEMBER 2026) – The Children’s Commissioners (CC), Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) takes serious note of the findings on bullying and cyberbullying contained in the Early Report on Malaysia’s Achievement in PISA 2025 issued by the Ministry of Education (MOE), as well as the recent statement by the Minister of Education concerning these findings.

The report records that 27% of Malaysian students reported being victims of at least one form of bullying several times a month or more, compared with 20% across OECD countries. The report also found that 44% reported being made fun of by other students, compared with 35.1% across OECD countries; 37.6% reported that other students spread nasty rumours about them, compared with 26.6%; and 12.4% reported being threatened by other students, compared with 12%. Of particular concern is the finding on cyberbullying. 5% of Malaysian students reported that hurtful information about them had been posted online without their consent, compared with 3% across OECD countries.

These findings must be understood not merely as a matter of school discipline or management, but as a child protection, safety, dignity and wellbeing concern. Every child should be able to attend school and participate in education without fear, intimidation, humiliation, violence or harassment. A safe learning environment is fundamental to children’s ability to learn, develop and participate meaningfully in education.

CC are particularly concerned about the implications of cyberbullying. Bullying is no longer confined to the physical school environment. As highlighted by the Minister of Education in her recent comments on the PISA findings, technology can allow harassment to continue after children return home, including through phones, chat groups and other digital spaces. The Minister also emphasised that students’ safety and wellbeing are closely linked to their ability to learn and develop.

Addressing bullying therefore requires a whole-of-system and whole-of-society approach. It cannot be the responsibility of MOE and schools alone. Parents and guardians have an important role in providing guidance, values and positive behaviour at home. Communities must foster a culture of care, empathy and responsibility, with members of society embracing a ‘jiwa pendidik’ – a willingness to guide, educate and protect children wherever bullying occurs.

All government agencies also have a role to play, according to their respective mandates. Bullying involving children may extend beyond education and require coordinated responses relating to child protection, mental and psychosocial wellbeing, digital safety, law enforcement and other areas. The private sector, including relevant digital and technology stakeholders, must likewise contribute to creating safer environments for children, particularly in the digital sphere.

CC therefore call for continued and strengthened efforts to prevent bullying and cyberbullying, identify cases at an early stage, ensure safe and accessible reporting mechanisms, protect children who report bullying, prevent retaliation or further victimisation, provide appropriate psychosocial and other support, and ensure that complaints are handled promptly and effectively.

Children must be able to speak up safely. They must know where to seek help when they experience or witness bullying, and their concerns must be listened to and taken seriously. No child should be blamed for reporting harm or placed at greater risk because they have sought protection.

TRIBUNAL FOR ANTI-BULLYING

CC also wish to highlight the Tribunal for Anti-Bullying (TAB) as an additional avenue for victims of bullying to seek justice and appropriate remedy. The TAB, established under the Anti-Bullying Act 2026 [Act 876], provides a simple, speedy and cost-free avenue for justice in respect of bullying incidents occurring after 1 March 2026. The Tribunal has jurisdiction over complaints concerning bullying that causes physical, psychological or social harm.

Complaints may be made to the Tribunal for Anti-Bullying in respect of bullying incidents occurring after 1 March 2026 at the following contact details:

-END-

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

11 September 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

KUALA LUMPUR (29 JULY 2026) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) expresses its deep concern over the ongoing land dispute involving the Orang Asli community of Kampung Sungai Cot, Maran, Pahang. While recognising the State Authority’s powers over land administration, SUHAKAM emphasises that such powers must be exercised in accordance with the Federal Constitution, the rule of law and Malaysia’s human rights obligations.

Orang Asli native customary land is far more than an economic asset. It is intrinsically linked to their identity, culture, spirituality, traditional knowledge and survival as Indigenous Peoples. The loss of customary lands therefore threatens not only livelihoods but also the continued existence of their cultural heritage and way of life. SUHAKAM has consistently maintained that the customary land rights of the Orang Asli deserve meaningful recognition and effective protection. Existing legal principles recognise that customary rights arising from the longstanding occupation and use of ancestral lands warrant protection. The Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 should therefore be implemented in a manner that gives full effect to its protective purpose and safeguards the rights and welfare of Orang Asli communities.

SUHAKAM further reiterates that development cannot come at the expense of the fundamental rights of Indigenous Peoples. Economic development and investment must be pursued in a manner that respects human rights, protects customary land rights and ensures that no community is left behind. This is also reflected in Malaysia’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (NAPBHR), spearheaded by the Prime Minister’s Department together with relevant ministries, which recognises respect for Indigenous Peoples’ rights and environmental protection as essential components of responsible business conduct. Economic interests should never override the rights of Orang Asli and the protection of their customary lands.

Consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), decisions affecting Indigenous Peoples’ lands, territories and resources should only proceed following meaningful consultation and with their Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). Consultation that occurs only after decisions have effectively been made cannot satisfy the requirements of genuine participation or respect for their rights.

SUHAKAM is particularly concerned that the use of criminal enforcement in the context of unresolved customary land disputes risks escalating tensions and undermining public confidence in efforts to achieve a just resolution. Where there are legitimate and unresolved claims over customary lands, priority should be given to dialogue, mediation and fair legal processes rather than enforcement measures that may further marginalise Orang Asli communities.

SUHAKAM therefore calls upon the Pahang State Government to:

1. ⁠immediately engage in meaningful dialogue with the affected Orang Asli community and all relevant stakeholders;
2. suspend any activities that may permanently affect the disputed customary lands until the claims have been independently and fairly resolved;
3. ensure that any future development affecting Orang Asli customary lands complies with the principle of FPIC; and
4. strengthen mechanisms for recognising, protecting and gazetting Orang Asli customary lands in accordance with the Federal Constitution, domestic jurisprudence and international human rights standards.

SUHAKAM also urges the Federal Government to accelerate comprehensive legal and policy reforms relating to Orang Asli land rights. The recurring nature of such disputes demonstrates the urgent need for a coherent national framework that provides legal certainty while respecting the rights, dignity and self-determination of Indigenous Peoples.

Respect for Indigenous Peoples’ rights is not an obstacle to development. Rather, it is the foundation of sustainable, inclusive and equitable development. Malaysia’s progress should never come at the cost of dispossessing Indigenous communities of the lands that have sustained them for generations. SUHAKAM remains ready to facilitate constructive dialogue with all parties and to continue advocating for solutions that uphold justice, human rights and the rule of law.

-END-

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
29 July 2026

KUALA LUMPUR (25 JULY 2026) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) notes with concern the Court of Appeal’s decision that children born out of wedlock to Malaysian fathers and non-Malaysian mothers are not entitled to Malaysian citizenship under the Federal Constitution.

SUHAKAM fully respects the independence of the judiciary and acknowledges that the Court is required to interpret and apply the Federal Constitution as it currently stands. Nevertheless, the decision highlights continuing gaps in Malaysia’s citizenship framework that may leave some children at risk of statelessness and burdened with indefinite and prolonged legal uncertainty.

Every child has the right to acquire a nationality. Article 7 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to which Malaysia has been a State Party since 1995, recognises the right of every child to be registered immediately after birth and to acquire a nationality. States are required to implement these rights, particularly where a child would otherwise be rendered stateless. In its Concluding Observations on Malaysia adopted in February 2026, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child urged Malaysia to strengthen its legal framework to ensure that all children have access to nationality without discrimination and to take effective measures to prevent and reduce childhood statelessness. The Committee further emphasised that the best interests of the child and the principle of non-discrimination should guide all decisions affecting children’s nationality rights.

SUHAKAM has consistently maintained that no child should be disadvantaged or denied access to nationality because of the marital status of their parents or circumstances beyond their control. Citizenship should not be determined by moral judgments relating to the circumstances of a child’s birth. Every child is entitled to equal protection and non-discrimination under the law, regardless of the marital status of their parents. A child’s legal identity and future should never depend on decisions or circumstances for which the child bears no responsibility. Citizenship is not merely a legal status; it is the gateway to the enjoyment of many fundamental rights, including access to education, healthcare, social protection, employment and full participation in society.

SUHAKAM therefore reiterates its longstanding call for Malaysia’s citizenship laws and policies to be progressively reformed in line with the principles of equality, non-discrimination and the best interests of the child. While the constitutional amendments allowing Malaysian mothers to confer citizenship on their children born overseas marked an important milestone, further reforms remain necessary to ensure that every child enjoys equal protection and that no child is left without effective access to nationality because of legal or administrative barriers.

Pending broader reforms, SUHAKAM also encourages the Government to continue utilising existing constitutional and administrative mechanisms available under Article 15A of the Federal Constitution which was specifically enacted to prevent children from becoming stateless. The executive discretion must be exercised in accordance with the child’s best interests and to prevent the possibility of children becoming stateless through no fault of theirs.

SUHAKAM remains committed to working constructively with the Government, Parliament and all relevant stakeholders to advance a child rights-based citizenship framework that places the best interests of every child at its core, in line with Malaysia’s obligations under the CRC.

-END-

Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)

25 July 2026