A Mixed Bag of Developments

When asked how Malaysia is progressing on the human rights front, Tan provided a nuanced assessment: “you will all see like a mix of progress, mix of stagnation, slash status quo and mix of regression. So it’s a mix of everything, pretty much.”

The report identifies several areas where meaningful progress has occurred alongside troubling setbacks that reflect Malaysia’s ongoing struggle with human rights reform in a country that was governed by the same political coalition [Barisan Nasional] for over six decades until 2018.

Concrete Progress in Key Areas

The most significant advancement came in death penalty reform. “In terms of areas of progress we’re looking at the reduction of the Death Row population from over 1200 to about 140 after the resentencing process,” Tan explained. “So at least that’s a concrete commitment demonstrated by the Malaysian government.”

In governance, progress emerged through transparency initiatives. Tan highlighted how “the prime minister’s department for law and institutional reform, they’ve essentially embarked on a very comprehensive set of consultations involving around 1500 stakeholders, just to discuss parameters of the RTI [Right to Information] law, which does demonstrate how serious the government.”

Other positive developments included citizenship amendments that “confer the citizenship rights to Malaysian mothers overseas born children” [addressing gender discrimination in citizenship laws] and reforms to SOSMA [Security Offences (Special Measures) Act - Malaysia’s anti-terrorism law] that saw the deletion of section 19 in SOSMA to align with child witness protection standards.

The SOSMA Dilemma: Old Habits Die Hard

Host Dashran Yohan pressed Tan on one of the report’s key concerns: “One of the key points highlighted in the report is the government’s continuous use and reliance on SOSMA. Could you expand on this for me? Why is it important?”

Tan’s response revealed troubling patterns: “When it comes to this continued use and reliance on SOSMA, one of SUARAM’s long standing observations is the misuse of SOSMA to arrest and detain by misuse. They arrest the suspects first, without adequate due diligence to establish whether the arrest is justified or not.”

The statistics are concerning. Tan noted that “there has been an increase, specifically of arrest and detention under SOSMA for organised crime. So essentially, we’re looking at, let’s say, 11 people in 2023 sparking up to 126 in 2024 when it comes to terrorism.”

Even more striking was the terrorism data: “if you look at 2023 it was zero cases. 2022 also zero cases. And in 2024 it went up to 27 and if you look at the trend in use of SOSMA for terrorism, there was essentially a spike, especially after the Ulu Tiram case [a terror attack in Johor in May 2024].”

Arrest First, Ask Questions Later

SUARAM’s research revealed deeply problematic enforcement patterns. “SUARAM does engage with former detainees of SOSMA, and among them, they were arrested not because they were actually involved in the crime, but because they were either in the same WhatsApp group, communicating, you know, in some WhatsApp group, which contained a couple of other actual suspects,” Tan explained. “Or they may, nearly may only be residing in the same neighbourhood, having certain relationships, whether as a neighbour, for example, as a family friend of these these suspects, but without knowing what their backgrounds were.”

Political Promises Meet Institutional Resistance

Yohan raised a crucial question about political will of the reformist government: “SOSMA is something that many of us have been talking about for quite some time now, and it’s also something that Pakatan Harapan really campaigned against before they came to power. So why is it that it becomes a quote, unquote, impossible task to abolish it once and for all, even after a change in government?”

According to Tan, “a key factor here is reluctance by relevant stakeholders in government to abolish or repeal this procedural law. including, let’s say, the law enforcement stakeholders.” She noted how this narrative persists across administrations: “starting from even 2013 in fact, immediately after SOSMA was tabled and passed in Parliament in 2013 there has been a constant narrative of the need to use SOSMA for crime prevention.”

Freedom of Expression: Same Problems, New Platforms

Yohan observed that “according to the SUARAM 2024 report, freedom of expression has deteriorated significantly in 2024. But how serious is the situation today really? Does it compare to the sort of curtailment of freedom of expression we suffered in previous years?”

Tan provided historical perspective: “I would not say it’s too different now compared to previous years. It’s just that the issues of the day have varied over the years. What would be different, at least in 2024 comparatively to previous years, is definitely the online freedom of expression, because, looking at the laws amended and passed last year... we’re looking at the government setting up a regulatory framework to police and monitor online freedom of expression a lot more closely than before, to the extent where it might infringe on fundamental liberties.”

The new regulatory framework includes the Communications and Multimedia Act amendments passed in December 2023, the Online Safety Act, and the social media licensing framework that was enforced from January 1 2024. These laws require social media platforms to obtain licences and comply with content removal requests from Malaysian authorities.

Police Accountability: A Black Hole of Information

The 2024 SUARAM report highlighted concerning gaps in police accountability. Tan NOTED that “more than 50% of police misconduct cases in 2024 saw no action beyond initial investigation. Also, there are no updates on the outcome of investigations.”

The Watered-Down Watchdog

Yohan asked about institutional solutions: “Is it still a matter of pushing for the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission, which was something that Civil Society Organisations were pushing for very strongly at one point, and then what we ended up getting during the first Pakatan Harapan government was a watered down Independent Police Conduct Commission?” [With no enforcement powers].

AsTan notes, “the IPCC can only give recommendations to the police force commission, and the police force commission is not mandated to reply or to conduct follow up actions in response to any recommendations.”

The numbers tell a stark story: “based on what’s released by the government from July 2023, to September 2024, the IPCC received 466 complaints. But only seven were classified for detailed investigation under the IPCC act.”

Public Appetite for Authoritarianism?

Yohan raised a troubling observation about Malaysian public discourse: “I wonder if there’s a sort of authoritarian desire by some members of the Malaysian public... On social media, what people tend to do when they see or hear something they don’t like is to immediately tag the Royal Malaysia Police. As if to say, come on, you need to come and arrest these people.”

This phenomenon reflects Malaysia’s experience of restrictive speech laws, where allegedly offensive or insulting comments can lead to arrest under various acts including the Sedition Act [dating from 1948, originally a colonial-era law]. According to Tan “the old regulatory framework is there. And on top of that, we have new amendments or new laws to tighten up certain loose ends. So we don’t really have a new culture, it’s more or less the same as before.”
.

Looking Forward: Key Reforms on the Horizon

When asked about priority reforms, Tan highlighted recent government commitments: “in February 2024, we got government commitments to review and or amend two laws, SOSMA and the Peaceful Assembly Act amendments.”

For SOSMA, “the government has committed to reviewing the list of bailable, unbailable and non-bailable offences under SOSMA, the setup of a special SOSMA court, and also amending section 30 of SOSMA.” [Section 30 allows continued detention even after acquittal pending appeals.]

On assembly rights, “the Prime Minister committed to removing section 11, which mandates organisers to get”approval“from venue owners and occupiers to hold protests.”

Tan concluded with cautious optimism about transparency: “with the Right to Information bill... a committee was set up to draft the bill. In fact, I have to say that it’s actually a progressive move, because the committee actually also involved Civil Society Organisation representatives.”

As Malaysia approaches the halfway point of the current government’s tenure, Tan emphasised the importance of the moment: “in 2025 definitely look out for all the promised reforms, especially given that it’s halfway through the government’s current tenure.”

About SUARAM

SUARAM (Suara Rakyat Malaysia) is Malaysia’s leading human rights organisation, established in 1989. The organisation monitors human rights violations, advocates for reform, and publishes annual human rights reports documenting the state of civil liberties in Malaysia.