Rethinking Malaysia’s approach to refugee aid

 

From Azril Amin

The government’s recent decision to bring some 127 Palestinians, including those injured, into this country has garnered widespread praise for its show of solidarity with the people of Gaza.

This compassionate gesture, aimed at providing urgent medical care to those wounded in the ongoing conflict, underscores Malaysia’s commitment to supporting Palestinians in their time of need.

However, while this act of kindness is commendable, it also raises important questions about the consistency and strategic application of our humanitarian efforts.

We must examine our approach to refugee aid more closely, particularly against the backdrop of the broader refugee situation in our own country.

As we extend a helping hand to those from Gaza, we must not forget the over 1,400 children from other conflict zones, mainly Rohingyas, who remain in detention centres across Malaysia.

These children have fled their own wars and atrocities, yet their experiences and needs are treated differently.

The Rohingyas, who have escaped brutal violence in Myanmar’s Rakhine state, are one of the most persecuted populations in the world.

Their plight has been extensively documented by international organisations with the United Nations (UN) describing the violence they face as having 

genocidal intent

.

Despite this, many Rohingya refugees in Malaysia find themselves languishing under detention, often without adequate access to basic services such as education and healthcare.

Malaysia’s Immigration Act 1959/63, under which these refugees are often detained, does not distinguish between refugees and other undocumented migrants, leading to a situation where even the most vulnerable and children are held in conditions that are far from ideal.

A 2020 report by the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network found that more than 1,000 children are currently detained in Malaysia without access to education and other essential services.

This reality stands in stark contrast to our government’s treatment of other refugees, highlighting an inconsistency in our approach to humanitarian aid.

The financial implications of the government’s decision to bring injured Palestinians to Malaysia are also significant.

The logistics of transporting individuals from Gaza to Malaysia, including air transport and medical care, likely involved considerable expenses. While the intent behind this move is noble, it is worth considering whether these resources could have been more effectively utilised.

Countries like Egypt, Turkey, and Jordan which are geographically closer to Gaza, have well-established medical facilities that are equipped to handle large numbers of injured individuals.

Turkey, for example, had treated over 1.5 million Syrians since the Syrian conflict began, and its proximity to Gaza would have allowed for quicker, less stressful transfers for the wounded.

Allocating resources to support medical facilities in these neighbouring countries might have ensured that more lives could be saved more efficiently, without the need for a long, exhausting journey to Malaysia.

Furthermore, Malaysia’s own healthcare system is already under significant strain. Reports of overcrowded hospitals and long waiting times are common, and the addition of even a small number of new patients can exacerbate these challenges.

At the same time, refugees already in Malaysia face steep medical costs. A 2019 report by the Health Equity Initiatives found that refugees are charged 50% more than Malaysian citizens for medical services, with pregnant refugee women sometimes paying up to 300% and more.

This disparity in healthcare access further highlights the need for a more balanced and equitable approach to our humanitarian efforts.

From a legal perspective, the decision to bring injured Palestinians to Malaysia also presents complexities. International humanitarian law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention, places the responsibility for the medical care of the occupied population on the occupying power.

By assuming this responsibility, Malaysia may unintentionally be relieving Israel of its legal obligations under international law.

International human rights treaties

Additionally, Malaysia’s own legal framework poses challenges. The Immigration Act 1959/63 criminalises undocumented migrants, including refugees, which can lead to detention and even deportation.

This approach is in tension with Malaysia’s commitments under international human rights treaties, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.

Although Malaysia has made reservations on certain provisions of these treaties, the treatment of refugees, especially children, within our borders often falls short of the standards these agreements set.

Moreover, Malaysia is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, which means that refugees in Malaysia lack legal recognition and protection.

This absence of a comprehensive legal framework leaves refugees vulnerable and leads to inconsistent policies that can sometimes appear selective.

While the intention behind Malaysia’s recent humanitarian gesture is commendable, it is essential that such compassion is applied consistently and strategically.

There is no question that the people of Gaza need and deserve our support, but so too do the many refugees who are already within our borders, particularly those who remain in detention.

A more balanced approach to refugee aid would ensure that resources are allocated in a way that maximises their impact, both for those we bring to our country and for those already here.

For example, investing in medical infrastructure in countries closer to conflict zones could allow us to provide timely and effective care to a larger number of people, without the need for long, costly transfers.

Simultaneously, addressing the needs of refugees within Malaysia, particularly in detention centres, would help us fulfill our international obligations and uphold our own values of compassion and justice.

By adopting a more strategic and balanced approach to refugee aid, Malaysia can better serve those in need, uphold its international commitments and truly embody the principles of compassion and justice that we hold dear.

It is time for Malaysia to refine its approach, ensuring that our actions are as effective and inclusive as our intentions. - FMT

Azril Amin is the founder and chairman of Centre for Human Rights Research and Advocacy, a coalition of Islamic NGOs.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.