On 20 June, as the world marks World Refugee Day, the Malaysian Bar stands in solidarity with refugees and the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia, “SUHAKAM”), and we condemn the harmful rhetoric and dehumanising attacks towards this vulnerable community. The principles of the rule of law and justice must extend to all human beings within our borders, regardless of status.
In a powerful statement issued by SUHAKAM on 3 June 2026,1 which is echoed by the Malaysian Bar, SUHAKAM said that “at a time when the world continues to witness grave atrocities against civilian populations, SUHAKAM reiterates that human suffering must not be measured selectively. Genocide is genocide, regardless of where it occurs. The international community has rightly expressed outrage over the devastation and loss of civilian lives in Gaza. That same commitment to human dignity and justice must extend to all peoples facing persecution, including the Rohingya, who have endured decades of systemic discrimination, statelessness, forced displacement, and mass atrocities in Myanmar”.
The Rohingyas are victims of genocide and are a persecuted and stateless people who fled Myanmar under desperate circumstances, following decades of violence, displacement and grave human rights violations. They do not come to Malaysia by choice in the ordinary sense; they come because they have nowhere else to go, seeking temporary safety while durable solutions are pursued.
As recognised by the courts of all civilised nations, including the Apex Court in Malaysia, the principle of non-refoulement — the absolute prohibition on returning any person to a territory where they face a real risk to life, freedom or safety — has evolved into customary international law, binding upon every State without exception, irrespective of treaty ratification. Therefore, Malaysia is exercising its State responsibility, and not doing charity, when it complies with this principle of customary international law. Article 33(1) of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (“1951 Refugee Convention”) states:
“Article 33: Prohibition of Expulsion or Return (“Refoulement”)
1. No Contracting State shall expel or return (“refouler”) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion”.
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom2 affirmed that non-refoulement is not merely a treaty obligation but has evolved into a substantive standard, ie customary international law, and governments cannot simply accept diplomatic assurances of safety without rigorous scrutiny. The Malaysian Federal Court3 has acknowledged and accepted that the principle of non-refoulement constitutes customary international law binding upon Malaysia.
Indeed, the foregoing principle has evolved into one of jus cogens,4 ie a peremptory norm of general international law, which is a norm acknowledged and accepted by all States within the international community that cannot be departed from or set aside under any circumstances, as defined under Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969).
Deporting the Rohingya to Myanmar is neither a humane nor a viable option. No person should be returned to a place where they face persecution, violence, genocide, torture or other serious harm. The principle of non-refoulement must be upheld. The Government must address these concerns responsibly: through law and policy, not hate; through facts, not fear.
In this regard, the Malaysian Government’s Dokumen Pendaftaran Pelarian (“DPP”) or Refugee Registration Document initiative raises concerns.5 While formal documentation is welcome, the Government has stated that the DPP does not guarantee permanent residence and that stated outcomes include deportation. Deportation would be contrary and incompatible with the customary international law obligations binding upon Malaysia, ie the principle of non-refoulement.
The Malaysian Bar therefore, calls upon the Government to:
- fully comply with the jus cogens principle of non-refoulement, and sign and accede to the other articles of the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, with no reservations. This is not just to cover the Rohingya but for all refugees who come to our shores;
- clarify and entrench the principles of the 1951 Refugee Convention, including non-refoulement in domestic law, and establish a fair and transparent asylum process with a right of access to legal counsel to all refugees;
- ensure the DPP registration system is administered as a humanitarian mechanism with full UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) cooperation and partnership, governed by and subject to robust data protection safeguards, and not used as a tool of surveillance or deportation, and to include all appropriate humanitarian guardrails; and
- take immediate steps to eliminate arbitrary and indefinite detention of any and all refugees, including women, children and families, in immigration detention centres, consistent with the repeated calls by international human rights bodies.6
The actions of a desperate few living in distressed and depressed circumstances should not be used as an excuse to tar an entire vulnerable community. A more compassionate and humanitarian approach is required.
Finally, no one and no quarter should seek to profit from the misfortune of refugees. Anyone or any quarter who, whether for personal or political mileage, purports to do so, only demonstrates a lack of class and compassion. Malaysia must choose humanity over vitriol, law and justice over mob sentiment, and conscience and principle over convenience.
Anand Raj
President
Malaysian Bar
20 June 2026
1 “Media Statement No. 31-2026_SUHAKAM Condemns Escalating Hate and Dehumanisation of the Rohingya Community”, SUHAKAM media statement, 3 June 2026.
2 AAA (Syria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 42.
3 Sundra Rajoo al Nadarajah v Menteri Luar Negeri, Malaysia & Ors [2021] 5 MLJ, and Noor Kayes Hashim Ullah @ Noor Kayes bt Hasimullah v Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Ors [2025] MLJU 2960.
4 “The jus cogens Nature of non-refoulement”, Jean Allain, Monash University (Australia), 2001, 13 International Journal of Refugee Law 533; and “The Duty Not to Return: Non-Refoulement as a Jus Cogens Norm in International Law”, Charlotte Melrose, Maastricht University, European Master’s Programme in Human Rights and Democratisation, 2024/25.
5 “Malaysia: New Refugee Registration System Raises Concerns”, Human Rights Watch website, 4 May 2026.
6 “Human Rights Watch Submission to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child Review of Malaysia 100th Pre-Session”, Human Rights Watch, February 2025; “We Can’t See the Sun: Malaysia’s Arbitrary Detention of Migrants and Refugees”, Human Rights Watch, March 2024; “Research Report: Impact of Prolonged Immigration Detention on Rohingya Families and Communities in Malaysia”, International Detention Coalition, May 2023; and “Malaysia: Rohingya Refugees Held Indefinitely in Inhumane and Degrading Conditions”, News Release, Fortify Rights”, 12 March 2026.