On April 9, 2025, Pamela Ling, a mother of three, disappeared on her way to a scheduled appointment at the MACC.
According to witness reports, her e-hailing ride was intercepted by multiple unknown vehicles, and she was allegedly forced into another car. Since then, there has been no word from her.
Her sudden and mysterious vanishing echoes the disappearances of other individuals in Malaysia, including Pastor Raymond Koh, Amri Che Mat, and the couple Joshua Hilmy and Ruth Sitepu, which have shaken public confidence and raised alarm among international human rights observers.
The US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), in its 2019 factsheet, cited Malaysia’s record of religious freedom violations and enforced disappearances as “systematic, ongoing, and egregious”.
USCIRF, whose mission is to defend international freedom of religion or belief, placed Malaysia in Tier 2 of its global rankings, a tier reserved for states that tolerate serious violations of this fundamental right.
Legal vacuum
The pattern is clear: individuals involved in religious, activist, or legal work, particularly when it involves minority groups or controversial issues that face disproportionate risks, and often without effective legal recourse.
What makes these disappearances so distressing is the environment in which they happen.
Malaysia has yet to criminalise enforced disappearance under its Penal Code, and the country has not ratified the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED).
As such, victims and their families often face a legal vacuum, and disappearances are treated as routine criminal investigations rather than exceptional violations of fundamental human rights.
Until meaningful reform occurs, individuals engaged in sensitive work or public criticism must take personal and collective steps to protect themselves.
High public visibility
A critical first step in risk prevention is maintaining high public visibility. Enforced disappearances thrive on secrecy and silence.
The more publicly known a person’s whereabouts, purpose, and affiliations are, the harder it becomes for any actor, be it rogue individuals or coordinated networks, to carry out an abduction unnoticed.
For individuals at high risk of enforced disappearance, visibility should not be mistaken for vanity; it is a form of self-defence.
Engaging with media, sharing travel plans with colleagues and loved ones, and participating in civil society networks are not merely good practices; they are essential survival strategies.
Ling, before her disappearance, had been involved in investigations that may have had high stakes. Her case demonstrates how vulnerable even public figures can be when visibility is compromised.
Technology is your friend
Closely linked to visibility is the role of digital security. In an era where smartphones are ubiquitous and connectivity is near constant, technology can be a powerful ally.
High-risk individuals should use GPS-enabled apps that allow trusted contacts to track their movements in real time.
Regular check-ins through secure messaging platforms can serve as lifelines, alerting others if someone goes off-grid.
The use of bodycams, dashcams, and encrypted communication tools is no longer just a precaution for journalists in war zones; it is increasingly relevant for Malaysian citizens doing advocacy or whistleblowing.
Technology, when paired with vigilance, forms an effective early warning system that can mobilise an immediate response if a disappearance is suspected.
Community support
Beyond personal security measures, there is also a pressing need for strong support networks. Isolation increases vulnerability.
By contrast, individuals embedded in protective communities, whether faith groups, activist circles, or NGO networks, benefit from a collective capacity to respond quickly.
If someone fails to appear at a meeting or check-in as planned, community networks can raise alerts, mobilise media attention, and pressure institutions to act.
In the case of enforced disappearances, time is of the essence. A well-prepared support group can initiate legal inquiries, contact international bodies, and disseminate information far faster than a single individual or family working alone.
Equally vital is the proactive documentation of threats or suspicious behaviour.
While Malaysia does not yet recognise enforced disappearance as a distinct crime, a documented pattern of harassment, surveillance, or intimidation can be critical in building a case for international advocacy or legal action.
Threats should be reported not only through domestic legal channels but also to human rights organisations, both local and international.
Submitting these records to groups such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, or even USCIRF ensures that if a disappearance does occur, the case does not begin from zero.
Rather, there will be a documented history pointing to credible risks, which can be used to prompt global responses.
International engagement is often an overlooked but powerful tool for protection. The more connected a high-risk individual is to the international human rights community, the more likely it is that their case will attract attention if something happens.
Fellowships, partnerships, and even media coverage beyond Malaysia’s borders can serve as a deterrent. Disappearances that make global headlines generate diplomatic fallout, which bad actors often seek to avoid.
Thus, those working in high-stakes fields should not hesitate to internationalise their advocacy. As USCIRF’s involvement in past Malaysian cases shows, global actors can influence domestic responses if they are informed in time.
Mitigation is not cure
Ultimately, while these steps may reduce the likelihood of enforced disappearance, they cannot substitute for comprehensive legal reform.
Malaysia urgently needs to ratify the ICPPED and incorporate enforced disappearance as a distinct criminal offence in domestic law.
This would not only affirm the rights of victims and their families but also provide the legal instruments needed to investigate and prosecute perpetrators effectively.
If such disappearances remain legally undefined and politically tolerated, no preventive measure will be enough.
The disappearances of Ling, Koh, and others remind us that human rights violations are not relics of the past; they are present and ongoing.
In the absence of institutional guarantees, self-protection becomes a grim necessity.
But this should not be the norm. Malaysia’s future depends not just on the resilience of its people, but on its willingness to protect them. - Mkini
R PANEIR SELVAM is the principal consultant of Arunachala Research & Consultancy Sdn Bhd, a think tank specialising in strategic national and geopolitical matters.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.