Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) said the government’s stance on human rights appears to be driven by political returns rather than morality, while Pusat Komas said Malaysia’s refugee treatment should match its commitments on the international stage.
They were responding to a statement by Amnesty International last month citing the government’s strong stance on Palestine but silence on Rohingya and Uyghur deportations as examples of its selective human rights agenda.
Suaram executive director Azura Nasron said identity politics — shaped by Islamisation and ethno-religious identity — drives public empathy, incentivising public displays of support in certain cases.
However, she said, solidarity with other Muslim communities was uneven due to geopolitics and security concerns.
When it comes to the Rohingya, their physical presence here is often perceived as a burden or threat, while the plight of the Uyghurs is muted due to sensitivities in relations with China, Azura said.
“Solidarity with Palestine is very strong because it is framed within the narrative of the ummah and the history of oppression against Muslims, reinforced by state and religious institutions.
“Solidarity with Palestine brings high rewards at low cost, while issues like the Rohingya, Uyghurs and migrant workers expose Malaysia’s internal contradictions in immigration, border control and labour.
“These issues push the state to avoid positions that invite domestic criticism,” Azura told FMT.
Pusat Komas director Jerald Joseph acknowledged that Malaysia’s solidarity in human rights issues was respected internationally but said the country’s treatment of refugees here left much to be desired.
He pointed out that more than 2,000 Rohingya refugees are currently being detained in immigration depots, with some being held for nearly five years, describing this as a major concern.
“Such prolonged detention represents a troubling way to treat refugees and asylum seekers who are seeking temporary protection in Malaysia.
“It effectively amounts to indefinite detention under the authority of the home ministry and immigration department,” said the former Suhakam commissioner.
Push for refugee reforms
Jerald and Azura said viewing refugees as security or economic threats fuels mistreatment and rights violations, which can erode Malaysia’s credibility in human rights by exposing the gap between global rhetoric and domestic practice.
Jerald called for rights‑based governance to restore Malaysia’s credibility, by protecting refugee freedoms, reforming policing, adhering to refugee conventions, tackling racism, and ratifying outstanding treaties.
He said a formal refugee framework would not attract asylum seekers, since seeking asylum is already a difficult and dangerous journey. Instead, it would signal Malaysia’s commitment to principled refugee management, he added.
Azura urged the government to put an end to deportations that violate non‑refoulement, and to strengthen independent monitoring bodies like Suhakam and the Independent Police Conduct Commission.
Jerald pointed to Malaysia’s compassionate record in the 1970s when it successfully hosted Vietnamese refugees after the Vietnam War. He argued that with far greater resources today, there is little justification for not doing the same now.